Campbell Hangay | Victorian Bar

Print | Print whole profile

About
Cases

Date of Admission:

03 Jun 2002

First Signed Bar Roll:

24 May 2007

Nationally Accredited Mediator:

05 Aug 2022

Division of Bar Roll:

Victorian Practising Counsel

Qualifications:

B.A., L.L.B., P.D.L.P.

Previous Occupation:

Solicitor - Saines & Partners, Ballarat; Solicitor - Maurice Blackburn Cashman - Ballarat; Solicitor - Herbert, Geer & Rundle, Melbourne

Profile:

Campbell Hangay practises in all areas of common law including intentional torts, occupiers liability, medical negligence, transport accident, workers compensation, institutional liability, industrial accident cases, and defamation. He is an experienced trial advocate appearing both as junior counsel and as leading counsel in common law trials. He has a special interest in claims for psychiatric compensation.

He appears in Appellate matters including Administrative law (appeals from decision makers), Judicial review (error of law), Appeals on merits and Appeals to the Court of Appeal. He has a special interest in Judicial Review applications to the Supreme Court regarding Medical Panel Opinions.

Campbell is a Nationally Accredited Mediator and accepts briefs as mediator in common law /personal injury matters, and general civil matters.

Cases:

Principe v Transport Accident Commission [2016] VSCA 205

Download Principe v Transport Accidcent Commission [2016] VSCA 205.pdf (279.5 KB)

I appeared as junior counsel for the Plaintiff lead by D. Hore-Lacy SC. The matter concerned the failure by the trial judge to have regard to relevant affidavit material.

Pulling v Yarra Ranges Shire Council [2018] VSC 248

Download Pulling v Yarra Ranges Shire Council [2018] VSC 248.pdf (386.28 KB)

A seminal decision regarding workers compensation for psychiatric injuries. I appeared as junior counsel for the Plaintiff lead by JP Gorton QC (as the then was, now the Hon. Justice Gorton of the Supreme Court).

Wagstaff Cranbourne Pty Ltd v Hashimi [2020] VSCA 33

Download Wagstaff Cranbourne Pty Ltd v Hashimi [2020] VSCA 33.pdf (195.88 KB)

I appeared as junior counsel for the Plaintiff lead by A.G Uren QC. The matter concerned the failure by a Medical Panel to afford procedural fairness.

El-Najjar v Swidryk Investments Pty ltd [2021] VSC 814

Download 20211209 El-Najjar v Swidryk Investments Pty Ltd [2021] VSC 814.pdf (287.28 KB)

*This decision was overturned on Appeal (see below)* When a Medical Panel fails to properly take into account the evidence before it, and fails to show in its reasons that it properly applied the evidence before it, the opinion will be liable to be quashed and set aside. In El-Najjar v Swidryk Investments Pty Ltd [2021] VSC 814, Richards J held that a Medical Panel's reasons had failed to show that the Panel had properly considered the evidence before it, and the Panel had failed to correctly apply the test of causation.

Menezes v Transport Accident Commission [2021] VCC 1511

Download MENEZES, Veena v TRANSPORT ACCIDENT COMMISSION [2021] VCC 1511.pdf (292.92 KB)

A Serious Injury Application. I appeared for the Plaintiff leading co-counsel. I was opposed by Senior Counsel (R Middleton K.C.). A good example of the practical application of the principles of Petkovski v Galletti [1994] 1 VR 436.

Sidiqi v Kotsios [2021] VSCA 187

Download Sidiqi v Kotsios [2021] VSCA 178.pdf (313.19 KB)

I appeared as junior counsel for the Plaintiff lead by A.G Uren KC.. The matter concerned the question of whether a Medical Panel had properly carried out its statutory function.

Bassily v Accurate Profile Roll Forming Pty Ltd [2022] VSC 112

Download Bassily v Accurate Profile Roll Forming Pty Ltd [2022] VSC 112 .pdf (219.44 KB)

When a Medical Panel fails to show in its reasons that it properly applied the evidence before it, the opinion will be liable to be quashed and set aside. In Bassily v Accurate Profile Roll Forming Pty Ltd [2022] VSC 112, Forbes J held that a Medical Panel's reasons had failed to show that the Panel had correctly applied the test of causation. The Panel's Reasons failed to show that it had taken into account the totality of the evidence of work duties performed in the course of employment.

Bakshi v VWA [2022] VCC 1662

Download Bakhshi v VWA [2022] VCC 1662.pdf (169.32 KB)

A serious Injury Application. I appeared for the Plaintiff leading co-counsel. A good example of the practical application of the principles of Petkovski v Galletti [1994] 1 VR 436.

Swidryk Investments v El-Najjar [2023] VSCA 11

Download Swidryk Investments v El-Najjar [2023] VSCA 11.pdf (420.4 KB)

An appeal from the trial division of the Supreme Court. The matter concerned the question of whether a Medical Panel had failed to give proper consideration to relevant considerations and whether it had provided adequate reasons. I appeared for the Respondent (Plaintiff below) leading co-counsel.

The information referred to above has been supplied by the barrister concerned. Neither Victorian Bar Inc nor the barrister's clerk have independently verified the accuracy or completeness of the information and neither accepts any responsibility in that regard.

Clerk

Greens List Barristers

+61 3 9225 7222

clerkb@greenslist.com.au

Area of Practice

Common Law
- Judicial Review
- Workers Compensation
- Work Injury Damages
- Negligence
- Intentional Torts
- Motor Vehicles & Transport
Commercial Law
- Superannuation
Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)
Appellate
- Civil Appeals
Industrial Relations Law & Employment Law
- Occupational Health & Safety (OH&S)
Criminal Law
- Intervention Orders
Public Law & Administrative Law
- Judicial Review
Inquests, Inquiries, Tribunals & Commissions
- Coronial Inquests

Languages Spoken

German