WorkCover barrister bill $38m

This is not Justice served.

WCV believes that this practice is an injustice being forced on us by a cashed up
VWA. This is a clear injustice being committed on those less likely to be able
to defend themselves on the same playing field! The VWA are fully aware that
WCV's are not in the position to be employing silks to defend them?

This is not natural justice being seen to be served.

The Victorian WorkCover Authority has been accused of mis-spending millions
of dollars to employ senior barristers to act against injured workers in court
cases.

Unionists and plaintiff lawyers have expressed outrage over internal
WorkCover figures revealing spending of nearly $38 million on barristers,
including almost $18 million on QCs and SCs, in the three years to May.

WorkCover denies any mis-spending, saying its $6 billion scheme is being
run cost-effectively and it must defend against fraudulent claims.

Victorian Trades Hall assistant secretary Nathan Niven said yesterday
that he was shocked by the spending on counsel and mystified by the
proportion that had gone to QCs.

"We are not talking High Court international law stuff here.
"For them (the authority) to be using QCs is absolutely excessive.
It is over the top," he said.

Mr Niven said unions had often expressed concern to the Government in the
past over the authority's spending on legal counsel but "the rich are getting
richer and the injured are not being cared for".

The Victorian president of the Australian Plaintiff Lawyers Association,
Simon Garnett, said the spending on senior counsel was indiscriminate.
"There is an excessive overuse of counsel," he said. "There is a lot of money
being spent on barristers' fees which I think shouldn't be spent."

But the authority has strongly defended its legal spending.

A spokeswoman for the authority said barristers had acted for the authority
in 11,000 court cases in the past three years with senior counsel acting in about
a fifth of those cases.She said the authority sought to resolve matters in
conciliation wherever possible but often used legal counsel where an employee's
credibility was at issue.

Over the past year, the authority had delivered $130 million in extra
impairment benefits to workers and a 10 per cent cut in employers'
premium, she said.She added that the figures detailing $37.6 million in
authority spending on legal counsel from May 2001 to April 30, 2004
were only "preliminary" and had to be viewed in the context of WorkCover
being a multibillion-dollar scheme.

But personal injury specialist Harry Nowicki accused the authority of briefing
senior counsel in relatively simple cases, saying it appeared that the authority
did so to intimidate injured workers."We think it was a policy (introduced)
to intimidate plaintiffs and their representatives," said Mr Nowicki, a senior
partner with Nowicki Carbone & Co.

"Silks should only be for the most difficult and complicated cases," he said

By Fergus Shiel Law Reporter, July 28, 2004