<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
	<channel>
		<title>Useful legal cases</title>
		<link>http://workcover.forumotion.com/useful-legal-cases-f9/-t1.htm</link>
		<description></description>
		<lastBuildDate>Mon, 10 Sep 2007 04:16:16 GMT</lastBuildDate>
		<ttl>10</ttl>
		
		<item>
			<title>Freedom of information requests</title>
			<link>http://workcover.forumotion.com/useful-legal-cases-f9/freedom-of-information-requests-t39.htm</link>
			<dc:creator>lucas</dc:creator>
			<description>There is a case on the queensland information commissioners website.

Its price vs nominal defendant. decision 99003 application s 2/95. Its a very strong case to say that documents held by investigators, solicitors, and external service providers have to be recalled when you make an FOI application.

Most times workcover do not give you this information.

When you do an FOI application make your request specific.

&quot; I request all documents and records relating to me held by Workcover  ...</description>
			<category>Useful legal cases</category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 10 Sep 2007 04:16:16 GMT</pubDate>
			<comments>http://workcover.forumotion.com/useful-legal-cases-f9/freedom-of-information-requests-t39.htm#53</comments>
			<guid>http://workcover.forumotion.com/useful-legal-cases-f9/freedom-of-information-requests-t39.htm</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Independent experts what has to be disclosed</title>
			<link>http://workcover.forumotion.com/useful-legal-cases-f9/independent-experts-what-has-to-be-disclosed-t38.htm</link>
			<dc:creator>Martin</dc:creator>
			<description>file:///C:/Documents%20and%20Settings/J%20Thompson/Desktop/New%20Folder/case%20law%20by%20topic/harris%20scarfe%20vs%20ernst%20young%20re%20medical%20experts%20and%20production.htm



This case outlines that almost everything generated in obtaining an expert opinion has to be dislcosed to you.

Even hand written notes of lawyers meeting with the doctors.



Headnote.



 HARRIS SCARFE  LTD (RECEIVERS &amp; MANAGERS APPOINTED) (IN LIQ) &amp; ORS v  ERNST  &amp; YOUNG &amp; ORS (No 6) [2006]  ...</description>
			<category>Useful legal cases</category>
			<pubDate>Sun, 26 Aug 2007 01:15:23 GMT</pubDate>
			<comments>http://workcover.forumotion.com/useful-legal-cases-f9/independent-experts-what-has-to-be-disclosed-t38.htm#52</comments>
			<guid>http://workcover.forumotion.com/useful-legal-cases-f9/independent-experts-what-has-to-be-disclosed-t38.htm</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Carter and Hayes</title>
			<link>http://workcover.forumotion.com/useful-legal-cases-f9/carter-and-hayes-t27.htm</link>
			<dc:creator>Admin</dc:creator>
			<description>This case is about discovery and timely discovery which should occur in every trial. Unfortunately this is not  done by Workcover in many cases. 

One must wonder if claimants and defendants do not get proper dislcosure are their trials really a search for the truth?

Or are they just a witchhunt to discredit and exert power over injured workers. 





http://www.austlii.edu.au//cgi-bin/disp.pl/au/cases/sa/SASC/1993/4208.html?query=carter%20v%20hayes

 

http://www.austlii.edu.au//cgi-bin/disp.pl/au/cases/sa/SASC/1994/4477.html?query=carter%20v%20hayes </description>
			<category>Useful legal cases</category>
			<pubDate>Thu, 07 Jun 2007 09:21:52 GMT</pubDate>
			<comments>http://workcover.forumotion.com/useful-legal-cases-f9/carter-and-hayes-t27.htm#36</comments>
			<guid>http://workcover.forumotion.com/useful-legal-cases-f9/carter-and-hayes-t27.htm</guid>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>