Barone and Comcare

[2005] AATA 1105

Administrative

Appeals

Tribunal

 

DECISION AND REASONS FOR DECISION [2005] AATA 1105

ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL      )

)          No W2004/184

GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE DIVISION		)
Re		SARASVATHI BARONE

Applicant

And COMCARE

Respondent

DECISION

Tribunal Deputy President S D Hotop
Dr D Weerasooriya, Member

Date 8 November 2005     

PlacePerth  

Decision

The Tribunal sets aside the reviewable decision of the respondent dated 10 May 2004 and, in substitution therefor, decides that:

· the respondent continued to be liable on and from 23 January 2004, and is presently liable, pursuant to s 124(1A) of the Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988 (Cth) (“the SRC Act”), to pay compensation under that Act to Mrs Barone in respect of her injury, namely, occupational overuse syndrome involving her right upper limb;

· the respondent continued to be liable on and from 23 January 2004, and is presently liable, to pay compensation by way of incapacity payments to Mrs Barone in accordance with s 131 of the SRC Act.

The Tribunal orders, pursuant to s 67(8) of the SRC Act, that the costs of these proceedings incurred by Mrs Barone be paid by the respondent.

............(sgd S D Hotop)................

Deputy President

CATCHWORDS

COMPENSATION – Commonwealth employees – applicant commenced employment with Australian Taxation Office in 1977 – applicant sustained injury to right arm in February 1984 – applicant claimed compensation in March 1984 – respondent accepted liability to pay compensation – applicant retired on invalidity grounds in November 1984 – applicant has not worked since – applicant in receipt of pension under superannuation scheme –applicant continues to suffer from work-related injury diagnosed as occupational overuse syndrome involving right upper limb – applicant totally incapacitated for work as a result of injury – respondent continues to be liable to pay compensation to applicant – reviewable decision set aside

Compensation (Commonwealth Government Employees) Act 1971 (Cth) s 27, s 37, s 45 and s 46

Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988 (Cth) s 4, s 14, s 123A, s 124, s 131 and s 132A

Re O’Halloran and Comcare Australia (AAT Decision No 10198, 25 May 1995)

Telstra Corporation Ltd v Warner (1994) 20 AAR 259    

REASONS FOR DECISION

8 November 2005	Deputy President S D Hotop   Dr D Weerasooriya, Member
INTRODUCTION

1.      Mrs Sarasvathi Barone, who is presently 57 years of age, commenced employment as a typist with the Australian Taxation Office (“ATO”) in 1977. In February 1984 she suffered a work-related injury which was then diagnosed as “tenosynovitis of the right wrist”, and, in the following month, she claimed compensation for that injury under the Compensation (Commonwealth Government Employees) Act 1971(Cth) (“the 1971 Act”). The respondent accepted liability to pay compensation to her under the 1971 Act and she was paid compensation initially under that Act and subsequently under the Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988 (Cth) (“the SRC Act”).

2. On 12 January 2004, however, a delegate of the respondent determined that, as from 23 January 2004, Mrs Barone had no further…