143 resultados para Closing costs
Resumo:
Pesticide spraying by farmers has an adverse impact on their health. However, in studies to date examining farmers’ exposure to pesticides, the costs of ill health and their determinants have been based on information provided by farmers themselves. Some doubt has therefore been cast on the reliability of these estimates. In this study, we address this by conducting surveys among two groups of farmers who use pesticides on a regular basis. The first group is made up of farmers who perceive that their ill health is due to exposure to pesticides and have obtained at least some form of treatment (described in this article as the ‘general farmer group’). The second group is composed of farmers whose ill health has been diagnosed by doctors and who have been treated in hospital for exposure to pesticides (described here as the ‘hospitalised farmer group’). Cost comparisons are made between the two groups of farmers. Regression analysis of the determinants of health costs show that the most important determinants of medical costs for both samples are the defensive expenditure, the quantity of pesticides used per acre per month, frequency of pesticide use and number of pesticides used per hour per day. The results have important policy implications.
Resumo:
Purpose: Service research typically relates switching costs to customer loyalty, and portrays them as effective switching deterrents that engender harmful word-of-mouth (WOM). Rather than to customer loyalty, this paper aims to relate switching costs to consumer inertia, and show that while switching costs may result in customer retention, they can engender positive and negative WOM. This depends on whether the inertia stems from satisfaction or indifference. Design/methodology/approach: A mall-intercept survey investigated 518 customers' perceptions of their mobile phone service providers. Structural equation modelling fitted the data to the conceptual model. Findings: Switching costs deterred switching and engendered negative WOM, but only with low-inertia customers. With high-inertia customers, retention and WOM behaviours depended on whether the inertia stemmed from satisfaction or indifference. Satisfied customers with high switching costs tended to stay, gave more positive and less negative WOM. With indifferent customers, switching costs were unrelated to retention or WOM behaviours. Research limitations/implications: While they may be perceived negatively, switching costs can engender PWOM. Hence, research should not consider switching costs alone without considering the context that produces them. Practical implications: Service providers should segment their customers into low-inertia, high-inertia/satisfied and high-inertia/indifferent, and target each segment differently. By converting customers into the high-inertia/satisfied segment, service providers can make the best use of switching costs – not only in the traditional sense as a barrier to defection, but also as a way of generating positive WOM. Originality/value: This study is the first to consider the role of inertia with switching costs, positive WOM, and negative WOM. The findings suggest that past studies portraying switching costs as negative impediments that evoke only negative WOM might be misleading.
Resumo:
In Uniline Australia Ltd ACN 010752057 v S Briggs Pty Ltd ACN 007415518 (No 2) [2009] FCA 920 Greenwood J considered a number of principles guiding the exercise of discretion in relation to costs, particularly when offers of compromise have been made under the formal process provided by the Federal Court Rules.
Resumo:
This article considers the implications of the decision in Paroz v Clifford Gouldson Lawyers [2012] QDC 151, which examined provisions of the Legal Profession Act 2007 (Qld) dealing with costs disclosure and assessment, and also considered associated provisions of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld).
Resumo:
This article considers the implications for Queensland practitioners of the decision of the New South Wales Court of Appeal in Branson v Tucker [2012] NSWCA 310. That decision involved the question whether the court retained a jurisdiction to examine the reasonableness of costs charged by a barrister, who had entered a costs agreement with solicitors, in circumstances where where had been no application under the Legal Profession Act 2004 (NSW) for an assessment of the costs the subject of the bill and it was no longer possible for such an application to be made.
Resumo:
The decision in the New South Wales Supreme Court in Boyce v McIntyre [2008] NSWSC 1218 involved determination of a number of issues relating to an assessment of costs under the Legal Profession Act 2004 (NSW). The issue of broad significance was whether a non-associated third party payer must pay the fixed fee that was agreed between the law practice and the client. The court found that the client agreement did not form the basis of assessing costs for the non-associated third party payer.
Resumo:
In BHP Coal Pty Ltd v K Orenstein & Koppel AG (No 2) [2009] QSC 64 McMurdo J considered the circumstances in which the ordinary rule under r 681 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld) (UCPR) that costs should follow the event should be departed from in favour of a party who was unsuccessful overall, but who succeeded on particular questions. When the court is satisfied that a departure from the usual order under r 681 of the UCPR is justified, it appears increasingly willing to exercise the power in r 684(2) to declare what percentage of costs was applicable to a particular issue
Resumo:
In Virgtel Ltd v Zabusky [2009] QCA 92 the Queensland Court of Appeal considered the scope of an order “as to costs only” within the meaning of s 253 of the Supreme Court Act 1995 (Qld) (‘the Act”). The Court also declined to accept submissions from one of the parties after oral hearing, and made some useful comments which serve as a reminder to practitioners of their obligations in that regard.
Resumo:
The decision of Applegarth J in Heartwood Architectural & Joinery Pty Ltd v Redchip Lawyers [2009] QSC 195 (27 July 2009) involved a costs order against solicitors personally. This decision is but one of several recent decisions in which the court has been persuaded that the circumstances justified costs orders against legal practitioners on the indemnity basis. These decisions serve as a reminder to practitioners of their disclosure obligations when seeking any interlocutory relief in an ex parte application. These obligations are now clearly set out in r 14.4 of the Legal Profession (Solicitors) Rule 2007 and r 25 of 2007 Barristers Rule. Inexperience or ignorance will not excuse breaches of the duties owed to the court.
Resumo:
The recent decision of the Court of Appeal in AGL Sales (Qld) Pty Ltd v Dawson Sales Pty Ltd [2009] QCA 262 provides clear direction on the Court’s expectations of a party seeking leave to appeal a costs order.This decision is likely to impact upon common practice in relation to appeals against costs orders. It sends a clear message to trial judges that they should not give leave as of course when giving a judgment in relation to costs, and that parties seeking leave under s 253 of the Supreme Court Act 1995 (Qld) should make a separate application. The application should be supported by material presenting an arguable case that the trial judge made an error in the exercise of the discretion of the kind described in House v King (1936) 55 CLR 499. A different, and interesting, aspect of this appeal is that it was the first wholly electronic civil appeal. The court-provided technology had been adopted at trial, and the Court of Appeal dispensed with any requirement for hard copy appeal record books.
Resumo:
A multi-faceted study is conducted with the objective of estimating the potential fiscal savings in annoyance and sleep disturbance related health costs due to providing improved building acoustic design standards. This study uses balcony acoustic treatments in response to road traffic noise as an example. The study area is the State of Queensland in Australia, where regional road traffic noise mapping data is used in conjunction with standard dose–response curves to estimate the population exposure levels. The background and the importance of using the selected road traffic noise indicators are discussed. In order to achieve the objective, correlations between the mapping indicator (LA10 (18 hour)) and the dose response curve indicators (Lden and Lnight) are established via analysis on a large database of road traffic noise measurement data. The existing noise exposure of the study area is used to estimate the fiscal reductions in health related costs through the application of simple estimations of costs per person per year per degree of annoyance or sleep disturbance. The results demonstrate that balcony acoustic treatments may provide a significant benefit towards reducing the health related costs of road traffic noise in a community.
Resumo:
Background WSUD implementation in the Gold Coast City Council area commenced more than a decade ago. As a result, Council is expected to be in possession of WSUD assets valued at over tens of million dollars. The Gold Coast City Council is responsible for the maintenance and long-term management of these WSUD assets. Any shortcoming in implementation of best WSUD practices can potentially result in substantial liabilities and ineffective expenditure for the Council in addition to reduced efficiencies and outcomes. This highlights the importance of periodic auditing of WSUD implementation. Project scope The overall study entailed the following tasks: * A state-of-the-art literature review of the conceptual hydraulic and water quality treatment principles, current state of knowledge in relation to industry standards, best practice and identification of knowledge gaps in relation to maintenance and management practices and potential barriers to the implementation of WSUD. * Council stakeholder interviews to understand current practical issues in relation to the implementation of WSUD and the process of WSUD application from development application approval to asset management. * Field auditing of selected WSUD systems for condition assessment and identification of possible strengths and weaknesses in implementation. * Review of the Land Development Guidelines in order to identify any gaps and to propose recommendations for improvement. Conclusions Given below is a consolidated summary of the findings of the study undertaken. State-of-the-art literature review Though the conceptual framework for WSUD implementation is well established, the underlying theoretical knowledge underpinning the treatment processes and maintenance regimes and life cycle costing are still not well understood. Essentially, these are the recurring themes in the literature, namely, the inadequate understanding of treatment processes and lack of guidance to ensure specificity of maintenance regimes and life cycle costing of WSUDs. The fundamental barriers to successful WSUD implementation are: * Lack of knowledge transfer – This essentially relates to the lack of appropriate dissemination of research outcomes and the common absence of protocols for knowledge transfer within the same organisation. * Cultural barriers – These relate to social and institutional factors, including institutional inertia and the lack of clear understanding of the benefits. * Fragmented responsibilities – This results from poor administrative integration within local councils in relation to WSUDs. * Technical barriers – These relate to lack of knowledge on operational and maintenance practices which is compounded by model limitations and the lack of long-term quantitative performance evaluation data. * Lack of engineering standards – Despite the availability of numerous guidelines which are non-enforceable and can sometimes be confusing, there is a need for stringent engineering standards. The knowledge gaps in relation to WSUDs are only closing very slowly. Some of the common knowledge gaps identified in recent publications have been recognised almost a decade ago. The key knowledge gaps identified in the published literature are: * lack of knowledge on operational and maintenance practices; * lack of reliable methodology for identifying life cycle issues including costs; * lack of technical knowledge on system performance; * lack of guidance on retrofitting in existing developments. Based on the review of barriers to WSUD implementation and current knowledge gaps, the following were identified as core areas for further investigation: * performance evaluation of WSUD devices to enhance model development and to assess their viability in the context of environmental, economic and social drivers; establishing realistic life cycle costs to strengthen maintenance and asset management practices; * development of guidelines specific to retrofitting in view of the unique challenges posed by existing urban precincts together with guidance to ensure site specificity; establishment of a process for knowledge translation for enhancing currently available best practice guidelines; * identification of drivers and overcoming of barriers in the areas of institutional fragmentation, knowledge gaps and awareness of WSUD practices. GCCC stakeholder interviews Fourteen staff members involved in WSUD systems management in the Gold Coast City Council, representing four Directorates were interviewed using a standard questionnaire. The primary issues identified by the stakeholders were: * standardisation of WSUD terminology; * clear protocols for safeguarding devices during the construction phase; * engagement of all council stakeholders in the WSUD process from the initial phase; * limitations in the Land Development Guidelines; * ensuring public safety through design; * system siting to avoid conflicts with environmental and public use of open space; * provision of adequate access for maintenance; * integration of social and ecosystem issues to ensure long-term viability of systems in relation to both, vandalism and visual recreation; * lack of performance monitoring and inadequacy of the maintenance budget; * lack of technical training for staff involved in WSUD design approvals and maintenance; incentives for developers for acting responsibly in stormwater management. Field auditing of WSUD systems A representative cross section of WSUD systems in the Gold Coast were audited in the field. The following strengths and weaknesses in WSUD implementation were noted: * The implementation of WSUD systems in the field is not consistent. * The concerns raised by the stakeholders during the interviews in relation to WSUD implementation was validated from the observations from the field auditing, particularly in relation to the following: * safeguarding of devices during the construction phase * public safety * accessibility for maintenance * lack of performance monitoring by Council to assess system performance * inadequate maintenance of existing systems to suit site specific requirements. * A treatment train approach is not being consistently adopted. * Most of the systems audited have satisfactorily catered for public safety. Accessibility for maintenance has been satisfactorily catered for in most of the systems that were audited. * Systems are being commissioned prior to construction activities being substantially completed. * The hydraulic design of most systems appears to be satisfactory. * The design intent of the systems is not always clear. Review of Land Development Guidelines The Land Development Guidelines (TDG) was extensively reviewed and the following primary issues were noted in relation to WSUD implementation: * the LDG appears to have been prepared primarily to provide guidance to developers. It is not clear to what extent the guidelines are applicable to Council staff involved in WSUD maintenance and management; * Section 13 is very voluminous and appears to be a compilation of a series of individual documents resulting in difficulties in locating specific information, a lack of integration and duplication of information; * the LDG has been developed with a primary focus on new urban precinct development and the retrofitting of systems in existing developments has not been specifically discussed; * WSUDs are discussed in two different sections in the LDG and it is not clear which section takes precedence as there are inconsistencies between the two sections; there is inconsistent terminology being used; * there is a need for consolidation of information provided in different sections in the LDG; * there are inconsistencies in the design criteria provided; * there is a need for regular updating of the LDG to ensure that the information provided encompasses the state-of-the-art; * there is limited guidance provided for the preparation of maintenance plans and life cycle costing to assist developers in asset handover and to assist Council staff in assessment. * Based on these observations, eleven recommendations have been provided which are discussed below. Additionally, the stakeholder provided the following specific comments during the interviews in relation to the LDG: * lack of flexibility to cover the different stages of the life cycle of the systems; * no differentiation in projects undertaken by developers and Council; * inadequate information with regards to safety issues such as maximum standing water depth, fencing and safety barriers and public access; * lack of detailed design criteria in relation to Crime Prevention through Environmental Design, safety, amenity, environment, surrounding uses and impacts on surroundings; * inadequate information regarding maintenance requirements specific to the assessment and compliance phases; * recommendations for plantings are based primarily on landscape requirements rather than pollutant uptake capability. Recommendations With regards to the Land Development Guidelines, the following specific recommendations are provided: 1. the relevant sections and their extent of applicability to Council should be clearly identified; 2. integration of the different subsections within Section 13 and re-formatting the document for easy reference; 3. the maintenance guidelines provided in Section 13 should be translated to a maintenance manual for guidance of Council staff; 4. should consider extending the Guidelines to specifically encompass retrofitting of WSUD systems to existing urban precincts; 5. Section 3 needs to be revised to be made consistent with Section 13, to ensure priority for WSUD practices in urban precincts and to move away from conventional stormwater drainage design such as kerb and channelling; 6. it would also be good to specify as to which Section takes predominance in relation to stormwater drainage. It is expected that Section 13 would take predominance over the other sections in the LDG; 7. terminology needs to be made consistent to avoid confusion among developers and Council staff. Water Sensitive Urban Design is the term commonly used in Australia for stormwater quality treatment, rather than Stormwater Quality Improvement Devices. This once again underlines the need for ensuring consistency between Section 3 and Section 13; 8. it would also be good if there is a glossary of commonly used terms in relation to WSUD for use by all stakeholders and which should also be reflected in the LDG; 9. consolidation of all WSUD information into one section should be considered together with appropriate indicators in other LDG Sections regarding the availability of WSUD information. Ensuring consistency in the information provided is implied; 10. Section 13 should be updated at regular intervals to ensure the incorporation of the latest in research outcomes and incorporating criteria and guidance based on the state-of-the-art knowledge. The updating could be undertaken, say, in five year cycles. This would help to overcome the current lack of knowledge transfer; 11. the Council should consider commissioning specialised studies to extend the current knowledge base in relation to WSUD maintenance and life cycle costing. Additionally, Recommendation 10 is also applicable in this instance. The following additional recommendations are made based on the state-of-the-art literature review, stakeholder interviews and field auditing of WSUD systems: 1. Performance monitoring of existing systems to assess improvements to water quality, identify modifications and enhancements to improve performance; 2. Appropriate and monitored maintenance during different phases of development of built assets over time is needed to investigate the most appropriate time/phase of development to commission the final WSUD asset. 3. Undertake focussed investigations in the areas of WSUD maintenance and asset management in order to establish more realistic life cycle costs of systems and maintenance schedules; 4. the engagement of all relevant Council stakeholders from the initial stage of concept planning through to asset handover, and ongoing monitoring. This close engagement of internal stakeholders will assist in building a greater understanding of responsibilities and contribute to overcoming constraints imposed by fragmented responsibilities; 5. the undertaking of a public education program to inform the community of the benefits and ecosystem functions of WSUD systems; 6. technical training to impart state-of-the-art knowledge to staff involved in the approval of designs and maintenance and management of WSUD projects; 7. during the construction phase, it is important to ensure that appropriate measures to safeguard WSUD devices are implemented; 8. risks associated with potential public access to open water zones should be minimised with the application of appropriate safety measures; 9. system siting should ensure that potential conflicts are avoided with respect to public and ecosystem needs; 10. integration of social and ecosystem issues to ensure long-term viability of systems; provide incentives to developers who are proactive and responsible in the area of stormwater management.
Resumo:
In Walter v Buckeridge [No.5] [2012] WASC 495 Le Miere J considered an application by the defendants for special costs orders under the applicable legislation in Western Australia. Aspects of the decision may be of persuasive value in dealing with similar issues under Queensland legislation.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND: The treatment for deep surgical site infection (SSI) following primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) varies internationally and it is at present unclear which treatment approaches are used in Australia. The aim of this study is to identify current treatment approaches in Queensland, Australia, show success rates and quantify the costs of different treatments. METHODS: Data for patients undergoing primary THA and treatment for infection between January 2006 and December 2009 in Queensland hospitals were extracted from routinely used hospital databases. Records were linked with pathology information to confirm positive organisms. Diagnosis and treatment of infection was determined using ICD-10-AM and ACHI codes, respectively. Treatment costs were estimated based on AR-DRG cost accounting codes assigned to each patient hospital episode. RESULTS: A total of n=114 patients with deep surgical site infection were identified. The majority of patients (74%) were first treated with debridement, antibiotics and implant retention (DAIR), which was successful in eradicating the infection in 60.3% of patients with an average cost of $13,187. The remaining first treatments were 1-stage revision, successful in 89.7% with average costs of $27,006, and 2-stage revisions, successful in 92.9% of cases with average costs of $42,772. Multiple treatments following 'failed DAIR' cost on average $29,560, for failed 1-stage revision were $24,357, for failed 2-stage revision were $70,381 and were $23,805 for excision arthroplasty. CONCLUSIONS: As treatment costs in Australia are high primary prevention is important and the economics of competing treatment choices should be carefully considered. These currently vary greatly across international settings.