The central concept is the reference, which is a formal dispute mechanism that allows either the claimant or the Board to take a compensation decision (or inaction) to TASCAT for review. The party to a reference includes the Board; this ensures the Board is always before the Tribunal in any reference it did not itself initiate. The President and Registrar are defined by reference to the Tasmanian Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2020; after the 2021 amendments, the President is the head of TASCAT rather than a separate Tribunal president. The Board is the statutory body that administers the compulsory motor accident compensation scheme under the Act. A relevant document is any document the Tribunal considers relevant to the matter; the initiating party must provide copies of all such documents in its possession. This imposes an obligation to be thorough at the outset, as failure to disclose may prejudice the case or delay proceedings. The regulations also define examination by reference to section 27B of the Act, which covers medical, psychiatric, or other assessments of the injured person. The Tribunal may require a party who is injured to undergo such an examination; this is a significant intrusion on personal autonomy but is standard in personal injury litigation. The concept of a bill of costs is central to the costs regime: it is a detailed itemised statement of the legal fees and disbursements claimed. A certificate of assessment is issued by the President after a costs assessment, which then becomes the basis for recovery. Importantly, the one-sixth rule (regulation 18(5)) is a cost-shifting penalty designed to discourage inflated bills. If the original bill is cut by one-sixth or more of the amount allowed, the party who served the bill loses its own assessment costs and may be ordered to pay the other side’s assessment costs. This creates a strong incentive to present reasonable costs claims.

The primary affected parties are individuals injured in motor accidents in Tasmania who claim scheduled benefits under the Act. If they are dissatisfied with a Board determination, refusal, or failure to pay, they must navigate these regulations to have the matter heard by TASCAT. The 14-day deadline for initiating a reference is particularly burdensome for unrepresented claimants, who may not understand the procedure or may still be recovering from injury. It also affects the Board, which is a party to every reference and may itself refer matters. The Board’s internal decision-makers and legal officers must be familiar with the notice requirements, document provision, and the costs regime. Legal practitioners representing claimants or the Board are directly affected: they must prepare the notices, serve documents, manage medical examinations, and handle costs assessments. The costs provisions are particularly relevant to solicitors and barristers, because the 85 percent rate of Supreme Court scale fees may not reflect actual fees charged, and the one-sixth rule penalises overreaching. Medical practitioners who conduct court-ordered examinations are affected in that they must provide reports that the Tribunal may distribute to all parties. Infants are represented through a parent, guardian, or a Tribunal-appointed person under regulation 5; this ensures claims involving minors are handled, but adds another layer of procedure. The TASCAT President and Registrar have administrative duties under the regulations: the President receives notices, fixes hearing dates (with at least 14 days’ notice unless parties agree to less), issues sealed determinations and reasons, conducts costs assessments, and manages the register. The register may be inspected by parties or any person whom the President considers to have a sufficient interest; this could include journalists or researchers, but the President has discretion to limit access. Finally, the court nearest to a party’s residence or business that has jurisdiction over the amount may be involved in enforcement of costs under regulation 20.

A person referring a matter to TASCAT under section 28(2) of the Act must give written notice in the form determined by the Board, together with a copy of all relevant documents in that person’s possession, to the President within 14 days of being notified of the Board’s determination or refusal, or of becoming aware of the Board’s failure to pay a scheduled benefit. That 14-day clock is strict, but the Tribunal may extend it on application. The notice must also be served on each other party to the reference within the same 14-day period. This dual obligation of filing with the President and serving all parties is a standard procedural requirement, but the short timeframe imposes real compliance costs, especially if the claimant is still gathering documents. The Board, when referring a matter under section 28(3), has the same duties. Any party or the Tribunal may request the Board to give written reasons for its determination under section 28(1), and the Board must comply within seven days, providing copies to all parties and the Tribunal. The Tribunal may require an injured party to undergo a medical examination; the Tribunal must then provide any resulting report to all parties if it considers it relevant. Parties have a right to at least 14 days’ notice of the hearing date, unless they agree to a shorter period. After a determination, the President must serve a sealed copy and reasons on each party. Parties may inspect the register at the Tribunal registry during office hours, as may any person the President considers to have a sufficient interest. On costs, the Tribunal may order a party to pay costs; the parties may then agree the amount. If not agreed, the party entitled to costs may serve a bill of costs. The receiving party has a duty to scrutinise the bill and object within 14 days, specifying each item objected to and detailed reasons, and must deliver the notice to the President and the serving party. If no objection is delivered, the party is taken to admit each item on the bill. The President must then fix an assessment hearing (if an objection is lodged) with at least seven days’ notice. The assessment may proceed in the absence of a party. The President issues a certificate of assessment within 48 hours. A party may apply for a review of the assessment within seven days of the certificate, specifying items and reasons; the Tribunal then conducts a review and may allow or disallow items, and make costs orders. Finally, the party entitled to costs may recover them as a judgment debt in the nearest court with jurisdiction.

The regulations do not create criminal offences or civil penalties with dollar amounts. Instead, they impose procedural consequences that operate as de facto penalties. The most significant is the one-sixth rule in regulation 18(5): if the disallowed costs on assessment amount to one-sixth or more of the allowed costs, the party who served the bill loses its own costs of the assessment and may be ordered to pay the other party’s assessment costs. This is a potent enforcement mechanism against overreaching in cost claims. It effectively penalises a party who inflates a bill by around 16.7 percent or more. This rule incentivises reasonable billing and discourages the use of cost assessment as a tactical weapon. Another enforcement mechanism is deemed admission under regulation 17(1): if a party served with a bill of costs does not deliver a notice of objection (with detailed reasons) to the President and the serving party within 14 days, that party is taken to admit each item. This means the bill becomes final and enforceable without any hearing. The 14-day period is short, and a party who misses it loses the right to contest individual line items. This is a harsh rule for inattentive parties. Regulation 18(3) allows the assessment to proceed in the absence of any party, so non-attendance does not stop the proceeding. If a party fails to comply with a Tribunal order (such as to undergo a medical examination or to produce documents) the regulations do not specify consequences, but the Tribunal’s general powers under the Tasmanian Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2020 would apply, including potential dismissal or adverse costs orders. The ultimate enforcement of costs is through regulation 20: costs payable under Part 3 may be recovered as if they were a judgment debt in the nearest competent court. This avoids the need to commence fresh proceedings; the certificate of assessment (or the agreed costs) can be filed and enforced as a court judgment. This is efficient but places the burden on the judgment creditor to locate and execute against the debtor’s assets.

The regulations are made under the Motor Accidents (Liabilities and Compensation) Act 1973, and their entire purpose is to facilitate references under section 28(2) and (3) of that Act. The primary Act defines the Board’s powers to determine claims and to pay scheduled benefits; the regulations add the procedural layer for dispute resolution. The regulations have been significantly amended by the Tasmanian Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2020 (Act No. 18 of 2021). Before that amendment, references were heard by a stand-alone Tribunal established under the Act. Since November 2021, TASCAT has assumed that jurisdiction, and the regulations now use the definitions of President and Registrar from the TASCAT Act. This means TASCAT’s procedural rules under its own Act also apply, though these regulations provide specific provisions for motor accident references. For example, the register kept under the TASCAT Act is the register referred to in regulation 9. The costs regime in Part 3 interacts with the Supreme Court Rules 2000, because the default fee rate is 85 percent of Part 1 of Schedule 1 to those Rules. This picks up the Supreme Court’s cost scale but caps it at 85 percent. This is significant because the Supreme Court scale may be updated from time to time, and those changes automatically flow through to these regulations without amendment. However, the 85 percent discount is fixed; if the Supreme Court scale goes up, the discount remains. The regulations also interact with the Rules Publication Act 1953, which governs the notification and numbering of statutory rules; this is procedural. Service of documents under regulation 11 permits various methods, including personal delivery, post, fax, and email (with consent for non-Board parties). The Interpretation Act (not specified but implied) would govern definitions and service by post. The regulations also interact with the general law of costs and with civil procedure: the costs assessment and review mechanism mirrors but is separate from the Supreme Court’s taxation of costs. Importantly, the regulations do not create a right to costs; the Tribunal has discretion to order costs under regulation 14, and that discretion would be exercised according to the general principles in TASCAT’s Act and any applicable policy. No costs are automatically awarded.

The Motor Accidents (Liabilities and Compensation) (Tribunal) Regulations 2019 were made on 29 May 2019 and notified in the Gazette on the same day, taking effect on 3 June 2019. They replaced the earlier regulations that had governed the previous Tribunal. The most substantial amendment occurred by operation of the Tasmanian Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2020 (Act No. 18 of 2021), which applied from 5 November 2021. That Act was a major reform that merged several tribunals into TASCAT. The amendments to these regulations were largely mechanical: the definition of President was replaced with a reference to the same meaning as in the TASCAT Act; the definition of Registrar was similarly inserted; and numerous references throughout the regulations were updated from “the Tribunal” (as a stand-alone body) to the President of TASCAT, where procedural functions are now performed by the President (such as receiving notices, fixing hearings, conducting costs assessments). Specifically, regulation 4 (reference to Tribunal) was amended to substitute “President” for the former presiding officer. Regulation 7 (notice of hearing date) now says “the President is to give notice” instead of the former office-holder. Regulation 8 (determination) now says the President serves the sealed determination. Regulation 9 (register) was substituted in full to refer to the register kept under the TASCAT Act. Regulation 11(2) was omitted, removing a now-redundant provision about service on the former Tribunal. Regulations 12 and 13 were rescinded in their entirety; those provisions are not reproduced in the current text, but they presumably dealt with former Tribunal-specific matters such as sittings or administrative arrangements. Regulations 17, 18, and 19 (costs objections and assessments) were amended to transfer functions from the former Tribunal to the President. The amendment history noted in the regulations themselves points to specific sections of the amending Act for each change, such as s. 277 for definition changes, s. 278 for regulation 4, s. 279 for regulation 7, s. 280 for regulation 8, s. 281 for regulation 9, s. 282 for regulation 11, ss. 283 for rescission of regulations 12 and 13, s. 284 for regulation 17, and s. 285 for regulation 18. No further amendments appear in the text provided.

The regulations themselves contain no references to specific court or tribunal decisions. The source text does not name any case, and it would be improper to invent litigation. However, it can be inferred that the regulations have been in operation since June 2019 and thus have been applied in numerous TASCAT proceedings. The procedural rules regarding time limits, medical examinations, and costs assessment are likely to have been the subject of interlocutory applications. For example, the 14-day time limit for referring a matter under regulation 4(4) is likely to have been contested in applications for extensions of time, where the Tribunal must consider what is a “reasonable” further period. The costs assessment provisions, particularly the one-sixth rule, may have been litigated in reviews under regulation 19. The right to inspect the register under regulation 9 may have been the subject of applications by third parties, with the President deciding whether each person has a “sufficient interest”. The deeming provision in regulation 17(1) (failure to object admits items) could be challenged on grounds of natural justice if a party did not receive the bill due to defective service. The service provisions in regulation 11 may also have been judicially considered, especially the deemed service by post on the day it would have been delivered in the ordinary course, which can be rebutted by evidence of non-delivery. The interaction with the TASCAT Act may also give rise to issues about whether the regulations are consistent with that Act’s procedural provisions. None of this can be stated as fact, but a practitioner should be aware that these provisions are not inert. The absence of reported decisions may simply reflect that most disputes are resolved at the Tribunal level without appeal to the Supreme Court.

The regulations contain several traps that can catch unwary parties. First, the 14-day time limit for referring a matter to the Tribunal under regulation 4(4) is very short. It runs from the date of notification of the Board’s determination or refusal, or from when the person becomes aware of the Board’s failure to pay a scheduled benefit. This is concurrent with the requirement to provide all relevant documents in the person’s possession. A claimant who delays in gathering documents may miss the deadline; extensions are available on application, but that adds cost and delay. The deadline is not extendable automatically, and the Tribunal’s discretion may not be exercised if there is no good reason for the delay. Second, the costs objection deadline is also 14 days from service of the bill of costs under regulation 17(1). If no notice of objection is delivered to the President and the serving party within that time, the items on the bill are deemed admitted. A party who is ill, disorganised, or without legal advice may lose the right to challenge any excessive fees. Third, the one-sixth rule in regulation 18(5) is a trap for the party serving the bill. If the bill is reduced by one-sixth or more of the amount allowed, the serving party not only loses its own assessment costs but may have to pay the other side’s assessment costs. This creates a strong incentive to serve conservative bills. A party who overestimates its costs may end up paying more than if it had been reasonable. Fourth, the default costs rate is 85 percent of the Supreme Court Rules scale. Many practitioners charge more than that, and they may not be able to recover the difference. The client may be liable for the shortfall unless a costs agreement specifies otherwise. Fifth, the medical examination power under regulation 10 is broad; the Tribunal may require an injured party to undergo an examination, and the resulting report may be shared with all parties. There is no explicit right to refuse, and a refusal could lead to adverse consequences under the TASCAT Act, such as dismissal of the reference. Sixth, service under regulation 11 is deemed on the day of faxing or emailing if done during business hours, or on the next business day otherwise. A party who serves late in the day or on a weekend may find the document is deemed served the next day, potentially affecting deadlines that run from service. Seventh, the register inspection right is limited to parties and those with a sufficient interest as determined by the President. A journalist or researcher without a direct stake may be denied access. Eighth, costs recovery under regulation 20 requires enforcement through the court nearest to the party’s residence or business; that may not always be convenient for the judgment creditor.

For a claimant or the Board initiating a reference, compliance begins immediately upon receipt of a Board determination, refusal, or awareness of non-payment. The first step is to prepare the written notice using the form determined by the Board. The form is not included in the regulations, so the practitioner must obtain it from the Board or TASCAT. Second, gather all relevant documents in the referring party’s possession. The term “relevant document” is broad and includes any document the Tribunal considers relevant later, so it is safer to disclose too much than too little. This may include medical reports, correspondence with the Board, and evidence of expenses. Third, deliver the notice and documents to the TASCAT President within 14 days. The regulations do not specify how to deliver to the President, but regulation 11 applies to documents under the regulations. The President is a person other than the Board or Tribunal, so service can be by personal delivery, leaving at the President’s office with an adult, post, or fax/email with consent. Given the sensitivity, personal delivery or registered post is advisable. Fourth, serve a copy of the notice on each other party (which will usually include the Board) within the same 14-day period. The service methods in regulation 11(3) apply; email requires the recipient’s written consent. If the Board is a party, service can be made under regulation 11(1) on its CEO. Fifth, consider whether an extension of time is needed. If the 14-day window has passed or is impossible to meet, make an application to the Tribunal immediately for a further period, explaining the reasons. Sixth, if the Board has not given written reasons for its determination, any party or the Tribunal may request them under regulation 6; the Board must provide them within seven days. This is important for preparing the case. Seventh, cooperate with any medical examination ordered by the Tribunal under regulation 10. Failure to attend may prejudice the case. If a report is produced, ensure it is provided to all parties if the Tribunal considers it relevant. Eighth, on the costs front, if the Tribunal makes a costs order, first try to agree the amount with the other party under regulation 15. If no agreement is reached, the party entitled to costs may serve a bill of costs. The bill should be prepared at 85 percent of the Supreme Court Rules scale unless the Tribunal orders otherwise. It is wise to keep the bill conservative to avoid the one-sixth rule. The serving party must then be prepared for an objection. If a bill is served on your client, scrutinise it immediately. Prepare a notice of objection within 14 days specifying each item objected to with detailed reasons, and deliver it to the President and the serving party. Do not miss this deadline as items will be deemed admitted. Attend the assessment hearing; the President may proceed in absence. After the certificate of assessment is issued, consider whether to apply for review within seven days. Finally, enforce any unpaid costs as a judgment debt in the nearest competent court. Keep copies of all notices, service receipts, and certificates for future reference.