Henschke v Workers' Compensation Regulator [2025] QIRC 196

• [2] On 4 December 2024, Mr Bradley Henschke (the Appellant), filed a Form 9 appealing a decision of the Workers' Compensation Regulator to reject his application for compensation.

• [3] On Wednesday 12 March 2025, a s 552A conference was held at the Commission for the purposes of case management and to ventilate procedural matters. The Commissioner who conducts a s 552A conference will not be decision-maker for the appeal subject of that conference.

• [4] Mr Henschke, representing himself, and Ms Jeffrey on behalf of the Workers' Compensation Regulator, attended the conference. At the conference, I explained the next steps of the process and that following the conference, directions would be issued regarding the filing of a Statement of Facts and Contentions for each party and an exchange of witness lists and outlines of evidence. At 11.45am on Wednesday 12 March 2025, I issued those directions. Relevantly, the directions ordered Mr Henschke to file his Statement of Facts and Contentions by 4:00pm on 21 May 2025 and the Respondent to file its Statement of Facts and Contentions by 4.00pm on 25 June 2025.

• [5] Mr Henschke has not filed a Statement of Facts and Contentions.

• [6] On Tuesday 1 July 2025 at 12.44pm, the Respondent filed a Form 9C, Respondent's Statement of Facts and Contentions. In email correspondence attaching the Form 9C, the Regulator apologised to the Commission and to Mr Henschke for the late filing of the document.

• [7] On Tuesday 1 July 2025 at 6.06pm, Mr Henschke wrote to the Registry and the Regulator stating:

And as per order 3 don't get ahead of your self now the person at the commission said there was no costs

Also note that this matter does not need to go ahead as its in the supreme court judicial review and we've already had the 1st directions hearing,

The supreme court can do so much more for me than what the commission will ever be able to do,

Commissions unfortunately are a delay tatict in Qld that can't really do anything except waste time,

Hence why it's in supreme court and on my terms not any one else's

• [8] On Wednesday 2 July 2025 at 6.13am, Mr Henschke wrote a further email to the Registry and the Regulator attaching correspondence. I will not reproduce that correspondence in full, but I note that in the correspondence, Mr Henschke says:

I am writing to demand an urgent and comprehensive re-evaluation of my workplace injury claim (lodged on or around 04/08/2021)

I implore WorkCover Queensland to immediately re-open and rigorously re-assess my case...

I expect a prompt and decisive response to this serious matter.

• [9] In light of Mr Henschke's advice of Tuesday 1 July that 'the matter does not need to go ahead as its in the supreme court', I requested that the Registry write to Mr Henschke on Thursday 3 July as follows:

In light of your email correspondence, please advise the Commission as to whether you intend to continue your matter.

Should you wish to discontinue, please complete and return a Form 27 - Request to discontinue proceeding. A link to this form can be found here.

• [10] On 10 February 2025, Mr Henschke filed a separate Form 9 WCR Notice of Appeal (WC/2025/28). I do not have carriage of that matter. On 19 May 2025 the Industrial Registry wrote to Mr Henschke informing him that that appeal would not be proceeding as his application to extend time had been denied.

• [11] On Thursday 3 July 2025, Mr Henschke wrote to the Industrial Registry embedding the correspondence referred to above at [10] and said:

so whats the change of tune all of a sudden, like you guys change ur mind quicker than like WTF is actually happening?

• [12] On Friday 4 July 2025, I asked the Industrial Registry to reply to Mr Henschke with the following:

The emails from 19 May 2025 which you have embedded refer to another matter which you filed in the Commission and not this matter. That your other matter will not proceed is not relevant to WC/2024/234.

The email sent from the Registry yesterday, Thursday 3 July was sent in reference to your email dated Tuesday 1 July where you stated, 'Also note that this matter does not need to go ahead as its in the supreme court judicial review...'.

Please advise whether you also wish to discontinue WC/2025/234. Should you wish to discontinue, please complete and return a Form 27 - Request to discontinue proceeding. A link to this form can be found here.

• [13] On Saturday 5 July 2025 at 6.29pm, Mr Henschke wrote:

why all of a sudden are you all showing so much interest in this,

Is it because ive sent the matter for judicial review?

I am simply fighting for what i should have been entitled to from the very beginning, my former employer lied and committed fraud bv giving workcover both false and misleading information, and this has detrimented me dearly,

You guys could have done the right thing from the start not stonewalled me at every chance you got

• [14] On Monday 7 July 2025 at 11.27am, I asked for the Registry to send the following to Mr Henschke:

The directions issued on 12 March 2025 remain in place.

The Commissioner draws your attention to the Code of Conduct which is to be observed by all parties when communicating with the Commission.

• [15] On Monday 7 July 2025 at 11.51am, Mr Henschke replied and said:

• [16] On Monday 7 July at 2.04pm, Mr Henschke sent a further email saying:

• [17] On Monday 7 July at 3.16pm, Ms Jeffrey of the Regulator wrote the following:

To assist the Commission and for the benefit of Mr Henschke, please find the Directions Order of 12 March 2025 attached.

The Regulator requests the attached Directions Order be vacated and a conference held before the Commission for the purpose of ventilating the issues raised by Mr Henschke prior to the filing of any further documents.

Should the Commission be minded to list the matter for conference, availability for the Regulator and Counsel are as follows:

• [18] On Monday 7 July 2025 at 4.41pm, Mr Henschke wrote to the Registry and the Regulator stating:

im not available on any date atm ... so more worried about how im doing that atm the moment with every ones delays and arse covering its not great.

• [19] Later on Monday 7 July at 5.19pm, Mr Henschke replied further as follows:

I was hoping to provide the request for staff, regulator, fair work, to testify that the workcover regulator should not be having people contravene their legislative responsibility...

Also then ask the staff handling the claim if their position on the matter would be different

in the alternative if they are available let's say in the next few days?

• [20] Noting Mr Henschke's unavailability as of 7 July but also that he appeared to be requesting a conference be held, I determined to list the matter for conference some weeks after that date and on Tuesday 8 July at 8.56am, I asked the Registry to reply as follows:

The Commissioner notes your current unavailability and the dates nominated by the Regulator.

A conference will be listed for the 30 July at 2:00pm. You may join by video link or telephone.

• [21] On Wednesday 9 July 2025, Mr Henschke wrote to the Registry and the Regulator as follows:

ok so should i send out request to the, regulator, fair work, to testify that the workcover regulator should not be having people contravene their legislative responsibility...

Also then ask the staff handling the claim if their position on the matter would be different

the hvnl regulator will be available in the next couple of weeks to discuss the rules and regulations of for truck drivers, and for which workcover had contravened a hvnl legislation

• [22] On Thursday 10 July 2025 at 9.57am, I asked the Registry to send the following:

Commission Pidgeon has read your correspondence and will not respond.

You are reminded to attend the conference on 30 July 2025. Please advise the Commission of your best contact details to facilitate this.

• [23] On Thursday 10 July 2025 at 10.08am, Mr Henschke wrote the following:

That's cool if she does not want to respond i put in a formal request for the nhvr to0 see if they have any one available for the 30/07/2025 also [phone number redacted]

Workcover a reasonable management action in a reasonable way as attached

all the while, everyone else is still getting there wages,

and everyone called a RMA, I WILL GET THIS OVERTURNED ONE DAY,

Then there will be a huge review of workcover right through the regulkater and the commission and since no one has even attempted to listen. i will be pushing for everyone to be sacked and start fresh

• [24] On Sunday 13 July at 8.51pm, Mr Henschke wrote:

can you please let commissioner pidgeon know that i deal with this after this week have my final hearing coming up against Australian retirement trust which im gonna win,.then on monday following this hearing i gotta some how fly to adelaide ...

• [25] On Monday 14 July at 1.12pm, Mr Henschke wrote:

i'm sorry I can longer support the commission and its pointless endeavours, the commission has done sweetly to assist me. i will be concentrating all my effort on the judicial review this is the one that i can get workcover to be finally liable for what has happened to me,

I have reported fraud to workcover, workcover regulator and they have all failed to act.

When I get my Judicial review and the Supreme Court makes order for each party including the regulator to investigate the fraud i have told the regulator over and over i will be seeking damages for delay,

and i put the workcover regulator on notice these orders are not far away

• [26] On Monday 14 July 2025 at 3.40pm, I requested the Registry to send the following:

The Commissioner notes your intention to discontinue your matter. A written discontinuance must be way (sic) of a Form 27 - Request to discontinue proceeding. A link to this form can be found here.

Please file a Form 27 in the Registry at your earliest convenience.

The listing for 30 July will remain in place until your Form 27 is received. If you are unable to file a written Form 27, you will be able to discontinue your matter orally at the conference on 30 July.

• [27] On Tuesday 29 July 2025 at 9.14am, Ms Jeffrey of the Regulator wrote the following:

I write to confirm if the Appellant has filed a form 27 to discontinue the appeal as discussed in the emails below.

If the Appellant has not yet filed and the conference remains listed for tomorrow 2pm before Industrial Commissioner Pidgeon, I can confirm my appearance on behalf of the Regulator via Zoom and can be reached on [email address redacted].

• [28] On Tuesday 29 July 2025 at 10.41am, I requested the Registry send the following email:

I confirm that the Industrial Registry is not in receipt of a Form 27 - Request to discontinue proceeding from Mr Henschke.

Thank you for confirming your appearances, you will receive a meeting invitation link to join the Zoom meeting just prior to the listing time.

• [29] On Tuesday 29 July 2025 at 3.08pm, Mr Henschke sent the following:

You know the part that sucks about the system what WorkCover done or did

Once this is overturned in the supreme court I will be calling everyone that has had a chance to handle my WorkCover case and asking them all one simple question.

Why when you had a chance to do something, why did you choose not to,?

Hide behind all the red tape you Like when this proceeds unless some one stops it now I will also be asking that everyone due to there own negligence looses there jobs without any chance of pensions due to negligence under the government code

• [30] Later on Tuesday 29 July 2025 at 4.08pm, Mr Henschke wrote a further email:

As I've found in the past commissions don't have the power to do shit and are a waste of actual time, something that put in place by someone to hopefully stop people from proceeding to the real Court where actual decisions are made, so unfortunately for this reason I won't be doing anything further and the threat by Melissa Jeffrey of having to pay for there barrister has really sunk in

I won my very 1st case in the federal court last week and it's a damn good feeling I went up against a barrister a owner of a law firm and some lucky sitting behind them and guess what I still won so the threats of having to pay for barristers means nothing to me and unfortunately the Commission is not the right place for my case with there no actual powers for change or to do anything except racking up cost orders which I won't be apart of

When my case proceeds in the supreme Court you all will be held accountable for your actions and disregarde for another human being hiding behind government red tape

The regulator has destroyed me and now it's time for the regulater to act and if they don't any and all failures will bring about there end

• [31] On Tuesday 29 July 2025 at 4.23pm, I asked the Registry to send the following to Mr Henschke:

The Commissioner has read your correspondence. As you have not filed a Form 27 - Request to discontinue proceeding, the conference listed for tomorrow will go ahead. Please provide a phone number or email address on which you can be contacted for the conference.

As you have clearly indicated in correspondence that you intend to discontinue your appeal, a failure to attend the conference as directed tomorrow may result in the Commissioner dismissing your appeal. Should you wish to discontinue prior to the conference tomorrow, please complete and return a Form 27 - Request to discontinue proceeding. A link to this form can be found here.

Please note that the Queensland Industrial Relations Commission's Code of Conduct requires you to include the other party in all communications with the Commission. I have therefore included the Respondent in this response.

Due to the content of your email, the following contacts may offer support

• [32] On Tuesday 29 July 2025 at 4.38pm, Mr Henschke replied as follows:

As advised in previous correspondence the Commission can't do anything for me

So if you want to have your meeting tomorrow have it I don't care maybe you can speak with the regulater about what they are gonna do before there world comes crashing down Infront of them

• [33] On 30 July at 2.00pm, a conference was held. Ms Jeffrey of the Regulator attended by Zoom. A Zoom link was sent to Mr Henschke prior to the listed time of 2.00pm. Mr Henschke did not respond nor did he join the Zoom meeting. Further, Mr Henschke was called prior to the conference, however, the call rang out and Mr Henschke did not answer. At the outset of the conference, Mr Henschke had not joined the zoom, and so I determined to make a final attempt to contact Mr Henschke by telephone. He did not answer. At the time of releasing this decision, Mr Henschke has not contacted the Registry.

• [34] Rule 45 of the IR Rules:

45 Failure to attend or to comply with directions order

(a) a party to a proceeding receives notice of a directions order made by the court, commission or registrar stating a time, date and place for a hearing or conference for the proceeding; and

(b) the party fails to attend the hearing or conference.

(a) a party to a proceeding receives notice of a directions order made by the court, commission or registrar; and

(c) make another order dealing with the proceeding that the court, commission or registrar considers appropriate, including, for example, a final order; or

• [35] The Codes of Conduct ('the Code') of the Industrial Court of Queensland and the Queensland Industrial Relations Commission provides for the conduct of members of the Commission and persons appearing before the Commission. Relevantly the second and third pages of the Code state the following:

1. Parties and their representatives have obligations to behave appropriately to both the Commission and each other, and in a way that helps provide a fair hearing for all.

1. Parties and their representatives should:
   • treat the Commission and other parties/representatives with courtesy and respect
   • act honestly, and not knowingly give false or misleading information
   • cooperate with other parties and the Commission to enable the just, efficient, timely and cost effective resolution of the issues in dispute
   • act promptly, comply with Commission directions, and minimise delay
   • take reasonable steps to make sure the costs incurred in connection with proceedings are reasonable and proportionate to the complexity and importance of the issues and amount in dispute, and
   • where appropriate, take reasonable steps to resolve disputes by agreement or to minimise the number of issues in dispute.

• [36] It goes without saying that Mr Henschke's correspondence fails to treat the Commission and other parties/representatives with courtesy and respect. I am satisfied that despite the tone and content of Mr Henschke's correspondence, he has been afforded courtesy and respect in correspondence addressed to him by the Registry, by the Registry on behalf of my chambers and in correspondence addressed to him by the Regulator and copied to the Industrial Registry.

• [37] As the correspondence above demonstrates, Mr Henschke has, on a range of occasions, informed the Commission of his desire to discontinue his appeal WC/2024/234. Despite being informed on multiple occasions that this must be done by the filing of a Form 27, Mr Henschke has elected not to file that that form.

• [38] In the absence of a formal discontinuance, the listed conference of the matter was held at 2.00pm today, 30 July 2025. Mr Henschke did not attend as directed.

• [39] In correspondence sent yesterday set out above at [31], Mr Henschke was clearly informed that a failure to attend the conference may lead to the matter being dismissed.

• [40] Mr Henschke's reply email set out above at [32] makes it clear that he understood the correspondence and was not intending to attend the conference.

• [41] In all the circumstances, I am satisfied that Mr Henschke has had ample opportunity to properly pursue his appeal WC/2024/234 and has made an active choice not to do so.

• [42] Rule 45 of the IR Rules applies if a party to a proceeding receives notice of a time, date and place for a conference for the proceeding and fails to attend the conference.[1] Rule 45(3)(a) provides that in those circumstances, the Commission may dismiss the proceeding.

• [43] Based on the extensive background of this matter evidenced through the correspondence set out above, I am satisfied that the discretion afforded to me by r 45 is enlivened, and that this is an appropriate circumstance in which to exercise that discretion.

1. Pursuant to r 45 of the Industrial Relations (Tribunals) Rules 2011, WC/2024/234 is dismissed.

[1] Rule 45(1)(a) and (b).