In Goodhew v WorkCover Queensland [2024] QSC 66 the court considered the issue of whether Jason Goodhew was considered a "worker" under the Workers Compensation Rehabilitation Act 2003 (Qld), affecting his eligibility for compensation following personal injuries sustained at work. WorkCover Queensland challenged Goodhew's status as a worker, hence their initial refusal to attend a compulsory conference—an essential step in the dispute resolution process outlined by the Act. However, the court, led by Henry J, did not deem it necessary to conclude on Goodhew's employment status at this preliminary stage, emphasising the Act's intention to promote settlement prior to courtroom proceedings. This approach allowed the disputed compensation claim to advance without resolving the core issue of Goodhew's worker status immediately, highlighting the Act's facilitative role in potentially settling disputes early. The court dismissed WorkCover's request for a declaration that Goodhew was not a worker and upheld Goodhew's application for the compulsory conference to proceed
top of page
bottom of page