| Focus: |
Ferguson v WorkCover Queensland [2013] QSC 78 |
| Services: |
Insurance |
| Industry Focus: |
Insurance |
Introduction
In Ferguson v WorkCover Queensland [2013] QSC 78 (27
March 2013) (Ferguson case), Justice Applegarth of
the Supreme Court of Queensland considered the interaction between
the Queensland and New South Wales workers' compensation
acts.1
In particular, the decision addresses what it means to
'usually work' or to be 'usually based' in a
particular state or states.
Background
Both of the above constructs are important when deciding whether
a worker should be claiming compensation or damages in New South
Wales or in Queensland.
Subsection 10(2) of the Workers' Compensation and
Rehabilitation Act 2003 (Qld) excludes from the definition of
damages "a liability against which the employer is required to
provide under – (a) another Act; or (b) a law of another
State, the Commonwealth or of another Country".
