Cagney v. D&J Building Contractors Pty Ltd [2024] QDC 162 - Travis Schultz & Partners

Keywords: where no estoppel, where the Plaintiff alleges he was a “worker” as defined by the Workers Compensation & Rehabilitation Act 2003, where the Plaintiff contends the elements of an estoppel are satisfied to estopp the Defendant from denying the Plaintiff was a “worker” in proceedings for damages, Where the Plaintiff was a trade-qualified self-employed carpenter who alleges he was engaged to perform ad hoc work for the Defendant as a construction worker, where WorkCover accepted the Plaintiff’s application for statutory compensation, whether a relationship or contract of employment existed between the Plaintiff and the Defendant

This content is restricted to site members (it's free to register). If you are an existing user, please log in. New users may register below.

Michael Callow
Special Counsel
View Bio >

Interesting article? Share it around.