Edition No.79
This edition was issued on 7 February 2025
Welcome
This week, we begin the recruitment process for the position of Division Head (Police Officer Support Scheme). This senior executive role demands extensive legal knowledge and strong leadership skills, directly reporting to me.
Elsewhere in this edition, you will find an update on the progress of the amended rule 67, along with reminders on the proper submission of additional documents. Overall, I am pleased to see a high level of compliance with the new 500-page limit.
Importantly, the Supreme Court’s Practice Note and Guideline on the use of artificial intelligence commenced on Monday, along with associated amendments to the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules. By the end of March, I will issue amended rules and a new Procedural Direction regarding evidence used in cases before the Commission. All decision makers at the Commission have been fully briefed on these changes and are expected to adhere to them without exception.
Finally, the Psychiatry Medical Review Panel (MRP) Pilot is set to commence next month. The intention of this pilot is to reduce waiting times in the MRP lifecycle.
Stay tuned for further updates, exciting Commission developments and opportunities.
Regards,
Judge Gerard Phillips
President
We’re Hiring! Division Head (Police Officer Support Scheme Division)
- Senior executive role
- Sydney CBD location
- Five-year term with eligibility for reappointment
The Division Head is responsible for the direction of business in the Police Officer Support Scheme Division of the Commission. The position will hold a dual appointment to the Workers Compensation Division and report to the President, a District Court Judge.
Applicants will be qualified legal practitioners of at least seven years’ standing or, in the opinion of the Minister, possess special knowledge, skill or expertise. Applicants will also have sound knowledge of workers compensation law and practice, demonstrated strategic leadership, and alternative dispute resolution and facilitation skills and experience.
Find out more about this opportunity
Rule 67 amendments including the 500-page limit
As practitioners recall, amendments to rule 67 of the Personal Injury Commission Rules 2021 and Procedural Direction PIC 3, a new Procedural Direction PIC 12 and consequential amendments to other Procedural Directions were enacted in November 2024.
These important reforms included the introduction of a 500-page limit on supporting documents accompanying initiating applications and replies for certain dispute types. The limit was introduced to help the Commission to meet its statutory mandate to resolve the real issues in proceedings justly, quickly, cost effectively and with as little formality as possible.
It has been encouraging to observe a high level of compliance (more than 99%) with the 500-page limit since it was enacted, indicating a smooth transition to the new requirements.
Requirements for lodging additional documents
Rule 67C makes provision for parties to make an Application to Lodge Additional Documents (ALAD) in proceedings. To date, the Commission continues to receive ALADs with no or insufficient reasons for the admission of additional documents or submissions that rely solely upon the former test (interests of justice).
Real issues in proceedings – rule 67C (4)
ALADs must go further than stating that the documents are relevant. A connection needs to be made between the additional documents and the real issues in the proceedings according to the test set out in the new rule 67C (4). Note: additional documents may be automatically introduced in medical assessment proceedings, if the requirements of rule 67C (2) are met.
Additional documents as directed by the Commission
If a party is directed by the Commission to submit additional documents, the documents must be lodged on Form P01 as a single document bundle that is indexed, paginated, and sorted by document category in accordance with rule 67(1), and refer to the Commission’s direction. Where a party is directed by the Commission to submit additional documents, there is no need to provide submissions addressing the test set out in rule 67C (4).
Stood Over List (SOL)
Practitioners are reminded that requests for an extension of time or the restoration of a matter from the SOL must be lodged in accordance with Procedural Direction MA1 via the new ‘Submissions/correspondence’ button in Pathway. The previous practice of using the messaging function to provide submissions in support of an extension of time or the restoration of a matter is no longer available. If documents, such as a medical report, are submitted in support of a request for an extension of time or the restoration of a matter, they must be uploaded separately on an ALAD.
For more information click here
Artificial Intelligence (AI)
The Supreme Court’s Practice Note and Guideline for using AI commenced this week along with associated amendments to the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules (UCPR).
The Commission has adopted the Supreme Court’s approach to AI and all decision makers for the Commission are expected to comply with the Guideline.
Amended rules and a new Procedural Direction regarding evidence used in cases will be issued by the end of March and will follow the approach of the Supreme Court.
Decision makers have also been reminded that AI tools are prohibited during all Commission hearings and events.
Access the Supreme Court's documents on AI
Psychiatry Medical Review Panel (MRP) Pilot
The high volume of medical assessments conducted in 2023 and 2024 has led to an increase in MRP applications, with a significant proportion relating to psychiatric MRPs. Combined with a shortage of psychiatrists in NSW, this has resulted in delays in the allocation and finalisation of psychiatric MRP disputes within the Commission.
The Psychiatry MRP Pilot sets out to address this by trialling a streamlined MRP dispute resolution process and the strategic utilisation of psychiatric medical assessor and member availability.
The intention of this pilot is to reduce waiting times in the MRP lifecycle.
For the pilot to succeed, the Commission requires users to submit dispute-related documentation in a timely manner and respond to panel directions in the requested timeframes. It is also imperative that claimants attend their scheduled re-examination with the panel’s medical assessor(s), as failure to do so leads to further unnecessary delays and wasted medical assessor and member availability.
Have a question about the Personal Injury Commission?
If you have a question you would like to ask about the Commission, please email us at [email protected]
Subscribe to Personal Injury Commission News here
Subscribeif you have not received this newsletter directly from the Commission and would like to receive future editions.