Barton and Comcare (Compensation)

This matter concerned an appeal by Dr Barton against a decision by Comcare regarding compensation for a psychiatric disorder. The dispute centred on whether the disorder was a result of reasonable administrative action taken in the workplace. The decision was made by N A Manetta SM in the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.

The legal issues before the Tribunal were whether Dr Barton had suffered an "injury" as defined by the relevant legislation, and if so, whether that injury was caused by her employment. Crucially, the Tribunal had to determine whether any administrative actions that contributed to the development or exacerbation of Dr Barton's psychiatric disorder were reasonable, both in their nature and in the manner in which they were carried out.

The Tribunal found that Dr Barton did suffer an injury, specifically the development of a psychiatric disorder that was diagnosable by May to June 2014. In reaching this conclusion, the Tribunal considered the psychiatric evidence, which indicated that while a definitive diagnosis was not possible in February 2014, Dr Barton's mental state had deteriorated and she was vulnerable to a worsening condition. The Tribunal concluded that none of the administrative actions identified as contributing factors to Dr Barton's disorder were objectively reasonable. Therefore, the defence under section 5A of the relevant Act, which requires administrative actions to be reasonable, was not made out.

Consequently, the Tribunal determined that Dr Barton had suffered a compensable injury. The Tribunal ordered that Dr Barton's injury was compensable.