| CERTIFICATE OF DETERMINATION OF MEMBER | |
Citation: | Broderick v Swan Hardware & Staff Pty Ltd [2023] NSWPIC 160 |
| APPLICANT: | Michael Broderick |
| RESPONDENT: | Swan Hardware & Staff Pty Ltd |
| senior Member: | Kerry Haddock |
| DATE OF DECISION: | 13 April 2023 |
| CATCHWORDS: | WORKERS COMPENSATION - Workers Compensation Act 1987; claim for permanent impairment compensation pursuant to section 66; accepted injury to right ankle; applicant claimed to have sustained consequential condition of previously injured right shoulder and left and right knees; consideration of McCarthy v Patrick Stevedores No 1 Pty Limited, Moon v Conmah Pty Limited, Trustees of the Roman Catholic Church for the Diocese of Parramatta v Brennan, Seif v Secretary, Department of Family and Community Services, Kumar v Royal Comfort Bedding Pty Ltd, Moriarty-Baes v Office Works Superstores Pty Ltd and Kooragang Cement Pty Ltd v Bates; Held – applicant sustained consequential conditions of his right shoulder, right knee; and left knee as a result of injury to his right ankle; matter remitted to the President of the Personal Injury Commission for referral to Medical Assessor. |
| determinations made: | 1. The matter is remitted to the President for referral to a Medical Assessor pursuant to s 321 of the Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998 for assessment as follows: (a) Date of injury: 8 August 2016 – personal injury. (b) Body systems/parts: (i) right lower extremity (right ankle and right knee); (ii) left lower extremity (left knee); (iii) right upper extremity (right shoulder), and (iv) scarring (TEMSKI). (c) Method of assessment: whole person impairment. 2. The documents to be reviewed by the Medical Assessor are: (a) Application to Resolve a Dispute and attached documents; (b) Reply and attached documents, and (c) Application to Admit Late Documents dated 30 November 2022 and attached documents. |
STATEMENT OF REASONS
BACKGROUND
The applicant, Michael Broderick (Mr Broderick) was employed by the respondent, Swan Hardware & Staff Pty Ltd as a delivery driver, storeman, and retail salesman.
Mr Broderick sustained an accepted injury to his right ankle on 8 August 2016. He also claims to have sustained consequential conditions of his right shoulder, lumbar spine, left knee, and right knee as a result of that injury. He sustained an accepted injury to his right shoulder, which is not relied on in these proceedings, on 13 April 2016.
On 14 April 2016, the respondent’s Register of Injuries recorded that on 13 April 2016, the applicant strained his right shoulder lifting a pack of pipes onto a ute (utility truck).
On 22 April 2016, the respondent completed an Employer Injury Claim Form. It recorded the injury to the applicant’s right shoulder on 13 April 2016, in the same terms as the Register of Injuries.
On 8 July 2016, the respondent’s Register of Injuries recorded that on that date, the applicant lost his footing and fell downstairs, injuring his right lower leg. An ambulance had been called.
By letter dated 8 July 2021, the applicant’s solicitors made on his behalf a claim for permanent…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read Broderick v Swan Hardware & Staff Pty Ltd 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
- [2023] NSWPIC 160
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issue before the court was whether Broderick's consequential conditions affecting his right shoulder and both knees were indeed a result of the accepted injury to his right ankle. The court needed to consider the relevant legislative framework and relevant case law, including McCarthy v Patrick Stevedores No 1 Pty Limited, Moon v Conmah Pty Limited, Trustees of the Roman Catholic Church for the Diocese of Parramatta v Brennan, Seif v Secretary, Department of Family and Community Services, Kumar v Royal Comfort Bedding Pty Ltd, Moriarty-Baes v Office Works Superstores Pty Ltd, and Kooragang Cement Pty Ltd v Bates. The court also had to determine whether the consequential conditions met the criteria for compensation under the Workers Compensation Act.
In delivering the judgment, the court meticulously reviewed the evidence and legal principles applicable to the case. It was held that Broderick did sustain consequential conditions of his right shoulder, right knee, and left knee as a result of the injury to his right ankle. The court found that the applicant's claims were supported by the evidence presented and that the consequential conditions were indeed linked to the accepted injury. Consequently, the matter was remitted to the President of the Personal Injury Commission for referral to a Medical Assessor to assess and determine the appropriate level of compensation. This decision underscores the importance of a detailed analysis of evidence and the application of relevant case law in determining workers' compensation claims.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
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.