| WORKERS COMPENSATION COMMISSION | ||
| DETERMINATION OF APPEAL AGAINST A DECISION OF THE COMMISSION CONSTITUTED BY AN ARBITRATOR | ||
| CITATION: | Bridge Inn Nominees Pty Ltd v Carr [2015] NSWWCCPD 64 | |
| APPELLANT: | Bridge Inn Nominees Pty Ltd | |
| RESPONDENT: | Marilyn Carr | |
| INSURER: | QBE Workers Compensation (NSW) Ltd | |
| FILE NUMBER: | A1-2126/15 | |
| ARBITRATOR: | Mr W Dalley | |
| DATE OF ARBITRATOR’S DECISION: | 11 August 2015 | |
| DATE OF APPEAL DECISION: | 16 November 2015 | |
| SUBJECT MATTER OF DECISION: | Adequacy of reasons; application of Beale v Government Insurance Office (NSW) (1997) 48 NSWLR 430; finding of consequential condition in the right shoulder from the use of crutches and overuse associated with an accepted injury to the left hip; assessment of expert evidence; application of principles in Kooragang Cement Pty Ltd v Bates (1994) 35 NSWLR 452; 10 NSWCCR 796 | |
| PRESIDENTIAL MEMBER: | President Judge Keating | |
| HEARING: | On the papers | |
| REPRESENTATION: | Appellant: | Curwoods Lawyers |
| Respondent: | Slater + Gordon Lawyers | |
| ORDERS MADE ON APPEAL: | 1. The Arbitrator’s determination of 11 August 2015 is confirmed. | |
INTRODUCTION
This appeal challenges an Arbitrator’s finding that the worker suffered a consequential condition in her right shoulder as a result of the use of crutches and using the right shoulder to support herself in various activities of daily living, following an accepted injury to her left hip. For the reasons explained below, the appeal is unsuccessful and the Arbitrator’s determination is confirmed.
BACKGROUND
Mrs Marilyn Carr, the respondent worker, was employed by Bridge Inn Nominees Pty Ltd, the appellant employer, as a cleaner at the Sportslander Motor Inn at Moama, New South Wales.
On 23 August 2013, Mrs Carr was cleaning bathrooms at the motor inn when she slipped on a tiled floor and fell heavily on to her left side. Mrs Carr suffered a fracture of the neck of the left femur and minor injuries to her left hand and both knees. There is no dispute with respect to those injuries.
Immediately after the incident, Mrs Carr was taken by ambulance to Echuca hospital. She was subsequently transferred to Bendigo hospital, where she underwent internal fixation of the fracture of the neck of the femur at the hand of Dr Husaini, locum doctor.
After four or five days Mrs Carr was discharged from hospital. Following her discharge from hospital Mrs Carr used crutches for 12 weeks. She alleges that due to the use of the crutches, and by reason of favouring the right arm, in addition to the impairment resulting from the fracture to the hip, she also suffered a consequential injury to the right shoulder.
On 8 January 2015, Mrs Carr’s legal representative, Slater + Gordon Lawyers, made a claim for lump sum compensation in the sum of $18,700 in respect of 13 per cent whole person impairment, pursuant to s 66 of the Workers Compensation Act 1987. This claim was made in accordance with Dr James Bodel’s assessment of 13 per cent, recorded in his report of 5 December 2014 to comprise of six per cent whole person impairment in respect of the right upper…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read Bridge Inn Nominees Pty Ltd v Carr and more:
- Read every judgment in full
- Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
- See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
- Download judgments as PDF or Word
One click creates your free account or signs you in.
By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.
- Case
- [2015] NSWWCCPD 64
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central issues before the court were whether the arbitrator had provided sufficient reasons for his decision, and whether the injury claimed by Mr Carr was caused by his employment. The court was required to examine the arbitrator’s decision and determine whether it was based on relevant considerations and was open to the arbitrator to make. The court was also required to assess the expert evidence presented by both parties and determine whether the injury claimed by Mr Carr was caused by his employment.
The court found that the arbitrator’s decision was based on relevant considerations and was open to the arbitrator to make. The court found that the arbitrator had properly considered the expert evidence presented by both parties and had provided adequate reasons for his decision. The court found that Mr Carr had suffered a shoulder injury as a result of his employment, and that the injury was caused by the use of crutches and overuse associated with an accepted injury to his left hip. The court found that the insurer was liable for Mr Carr’s medical costs. The court noted that the principles set out in Beale v Government Insurance Office (NSW) and Kooragang Cement Pty Ltd v Bates were relevant to the assessment of the arbitrator’s decision and the expert evidence.
The Supreme Court of New South Wales confirmed the arbitrator’s determination of 11 August 2015, and found that the insurer was liable for Mr Carr’s medical costs. The court found that the arbitrator had provided adequate reasons for his decision, and that the injury claimed by Mr Carr was caused by his employment. The insurer’s application for review was dismissed with costs.
Orders
Orders of the court
1. The Arbitrator’s determination of 11 August 2015 is confirmed.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.