Brackenreg and Comcare

[2005] AATA 1121

Administrative

Appeals

Tribunal

 

DECISION AND REASONS FOR DECISION [2005] AATA 1121

ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL      )

)           No D2003/34; D2004/13

GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE DIVISION		)
Re		DEBORAH BRACKENREG

Applicant

And COMCARE

Respondent

DECISION

Tribunal Senior Member B J McCabe

Date15 November 2005

PlaceBrisbane

Decision The decisions under review are affirmed.

..........[Sgd]........

B J McCabe

SENIOR MEMBER

CATCHWORDS

COMPENSATION – Commonwealth employees – applicant involved in motor vehicle accident – respondent accepted liability for musculo-ligamentous neck injury – decisions under review limited to musculo-ligamentous neck injury – musculo-ligamentous neck injury no longer present – ongoing medical conditions not attributable to original musculo-ligamentous neck injury – decisions under review affirmed.

Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988 ss 16, 29, 137

Brackenreg and Comcare [2002] AATA 1325

REASONS FOR DECISION

15 November 2005               Senior Member B J McCabe

introduction

1. Deborah Brackenreg was injured in a motor vehicle accident on her way to work with the Northern Territory Treasury department on 7 March 1984. On 30 April 1984, the predecessor of the respondent accepted liability for a "musculo-ligamentous neck injury" sustained in the motor vehicle accident. In 1995, the respondent redeemed the applicant’s rights to ongoing weekly compensation when it paid her a lump sum pursuant to s 137 of the Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988 (the SRC Act). The applicant says she is still suffering from the injuries she sustained in 1984 and has asked Comcare to pay her medical expenses pursuant to s 16 of the SRC Act. She has also asked for household assistance (specifically, assistance with lawn-mowing and gardening) under s 29 of the SRC Act. The respondent denies the applicant continues to suffer from the injuries for which it is liable. It refuses to meet the expenses.

2.      The applicant has asked the Tribunal to reconsider the matter. For reasons I will explain, I think Comcare is not liable to pay the expenses. The decisions under review are therefore affirmed.

the material before the tribunal

3. The Tribunal was provided with the documents required under s 37 of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975. Two volumes were filed in respect of Case No D2003/34 (exhibit one), and a separate volume was filed in Case No D2004/13 (exhibit two). The following documents were also tendered in evidence at the hearing:

·List of applicant’s medications (exhibit 3);

·Summonsed documents received from Royal Darwin Hospital - 12 November 2004 (exhibit 4);

·Handwritten extract from summonsed documents received from Night and Day Medical and Dental Surgery – 12 December 2003 (exhibit 5);

·Extract from the transcript of previous proceedings dated 31 May 2000 (exhibit 6);

·Letter of Ms Brackenreg to Professor Stoodley dated 28 September 2004 (exhibit 7);

·Summonsed documents received from Smith Street Dental Practice – 23 June 2005 (exhibit 8);

·Letter of Professor Stoodley to Dr Chong Wah dated 13 August 2004 (exhibit 9);

·Letter of Professor Stoodley to Ms Brackenreg dated 17 November 2004 (exhibit 10);

·Report of Dr Blue dated 2 August 2004 (exhibit 11);

·Report…