BNW v State of New South Wales (Northern NSW Local Health District) - [2025] NSWPIC 32

CERTIFICATE OF DETERMINATION OF MEMBER
CITATION:	BNW v State of New South Wales (Northern NSW Local Health District) [2025] NSWPIC 32
APPLICANT:	BNW
RESPONDENT:	State of New South Wales (Northern NSW Local Health District)
MEMBER:	Catherine McDonald
DATE OF DECISION:	3 February 2025
CATCHWORDS:	WORKERS COMPENSATION - Claim for weekly compensation as a result of alleged psychological injury and functional neurological disorder as a result of events in the workplace; extensive psychological history; AV v AW; Kooragang Cement Ltd v Bates; no evidence of psychological history between meeting and onset of functional neurological disorder; the distress suffered by the applicant led to the development of functional neurological disorder; Held – award for the applicant for weekly compensation.
DETERMINATIONS MADE:	The Commission determines: 1. The respondent is to pay the applicant $970.29 per week from 19 November 2022 to date and continuing. 2. I grant liberty to apply if there is any dispute as to indexation of that amount. A statement is attached setting out the Commission’s reasons for the determination.

STATEMENT OF REASONS

BACKGROUND

BNW was employed by the State of New South Wales (Northern NSW Local Health District) (the State) as a registered nurse at Lismore Hospital. She alleges that she suffered an injury on 18 November 2022 in the form of a functional neurological disorder which was caused by a conflict in the workplace on 14 November 2022 concerning the care of a paediatric patient.
There is no dispute that a meeting on 14 November occurred. The parties agree that the following issues are in dispute:
(a)    whether BNW suffered the aggravation of a disease – being a psychological condition – on 14 November 2022 to which employment was the main contributing factor;
(b)    whether BNW suffered a functional neurological disorder as a result of the conflict on 14 November, the date of that injury being 18 November 2022, and
(c)    whether the events in the workplace were the main contributing factor to BNW suffering a functional neurological disorder.
There is no dispute that BNW has no current work capacity but the State disputes that the incapacity was caused by an injury as defined in the Workers Compensation Act 1987 (the 1987 Act).
BNW’s claim is for weekly compensation only.

PROCEDURE BEFORE THE PERSONAL INJURY COMMISSION

BNW commenced proceedings in 2023 which were discontinued at a preliminary conference on 7 December 2023.
These proceedings were listed for preliminary conference on 8 November 2024 when the State sought leave to issue a series of directions for production. Despite references to a relevant pre-existing condition, there was no evidence in the Application to Resolve a Dispute (ARD) which pre-dated the injury. I granted leave to issue the directions because they were necessary to fill gaps in a complex medical case and to provide details about BNW’s pre-injury treatment.
The claim was listed for conciliation conference and arbitration hearing on 14 January 2025 by videoconference. Mr McEnaney of counsel, instructed by Mr Dunn, appeared for BNW and Mr Saul…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading BNW v State of New South Wales (Northern NSW Local Health Di...

Details

AGLC: Petronio v State of New South Wales (Northern NSW Local Health District) [2025] NSWPIC 32
Case: [2025] NSWPIC 32
Decision Date: 3 February 2025

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of BNW v State of New South Wales (Northern NSW Local Health District), the applicant, BNW, sought weekly compensation for an alleged psychological injury and functional neurological disorder stemming from events occurring in the workplace. The dispute was adjudicated in the Dust Diseases Tribunal of Australia. BNW claimed that the workplace events triggered the onset of their psychological injury and functional neurological disorder, which were not present prior to the relevant incidents. The respondent, the State of New South Wales, contested the claim, asserting that there was no causal link between the workplace events and the applicant's condition.

The primary legal issues the court needed to resolve included whether the applicant's psychological injury and functional neurological disorder were caused by the workplace events, and if so, whether these conditions were compensable under the relevant legislation. The court examined the applicant's extensive psychological history and the evidence presented regarding the onset of their symptoms. The court also considered the principles established in previous cases such as AV v AW and Kooragang Cement Ltd v Bates. The applicant's distress as a result of the workplace events was a critical factor in the court's determination of causation.

The court found that the applicant's psychological history did not include the symptoms of their functional neurological disorder prior to the workplace events. This, combined with the distress suffered by the applicant as a result of those events, led the court to conclude that the workplace incidents were the cause of the functional neurological disorder. The court awarded the applicant weekly compensation, recognising the significant impact of their condition on their life and wellbeing. The court's decision was based on a careful analysis of the evidence and the application of relevant legal principles. The final orders included an award for weekly compensation to the applicant, reflecting the court's determination of the causal link between the workplace events and the applicant's condition.

Orders