Administrative Appeals Tribunal
DECISION AND REASONS FOR DECISION [2010] AATA 812
ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL )
) No 2009/6116
GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE DIVISION ) Re AMANDA BROOKS Applicant
And
AUSTRALIAN POSTAL CORPORATION
Respondent
DECISION
Tribunal Mr R G Kenny, Senior Member; and
Associate Professor J B Morley RFD, MemberDate22 October 2010
PlaceBrisbane
Decision The Tribunal sets aside the decision under review and substitutes its decision that the Australian Postal Corporation continues to be liable to pay compensation to the applicant under the Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988 (Cth) in respect of incapacity for the aggravation of greater trochanteric bursitis left hip. .................[Sgd]...................
Senior Member
6. As this matter proceeded, it became important that the nature of Ms Brooks' compensable medical condition be clarified. This proved to be no easy task as the medical experts indicated that this injury is not a fully understood pathological entity. The medical evidence consisted of the reports of three investigations of Ms Brooks' left hip region and of medical reports from Ms Brooks' designated general practitioner and four orthopaedic surgeons, three of whom also gave oral evidence.
The investigation reports
7. The first of the investigations was requested by Dr Rath. This was an ultrasound examination of the left trochanteric bursa in conjunction with a second cortisone injection. This was conducted on 7 November 2008 by Dr Michael Crouch, whose report reads:
Initial ultrasound demonstrates some thickening of the soft tissues in the region of the trochanteric bursa indicating changes of trochanteric bursitis. Under ultrasound guidance 2 ml of Celestone Chronodrose and 2 ml of Marcain was injected into the subacromial bursa without complications. Mrs Brooks will monitor her own progress over the next few days.[4]
[4] Exhibit 1, T9/12.
8. Subsequently, Dr Rath’s practice colleague, Dr Mark Zischke, arranged Ms Brooks' x-ray examination of her left hip. On 30 January 2009, Dr Eugene Lim reported the findings:
Slight bony sclerosis is seen at the superior articular surfaces in keeping with early osteoarthritis. There is a sclerotic bony lesion in the proximal femoral shaft in keeping with a bone island. Mild degenerative changes are seen at the lest [sic: left] S1 [sic: SI, i.e. sacro-iliac] joint.[5]
[5] Exhibit 1, T20/29.
9. This was followed, on 6 March 2009, by an MRI scan of Ms Brooks' left hip, performed at the request of her treating orthopaedic surgeon, Dr Cameron Cooke. Dr David Simpson provided the report:
Findings
There is mild increase intrasubstance signal involving the left gluteus minimus tendon associated with peritendinous soft-tissue oedema. Appearances would be in keeping with gluteus minimus tendinosis and 'trochanteric bursitis'. The left gluteus minimus tendon remains intact.
The left gluteus medius tendon appears normal and intact. Both the left gluteus minimus and medius muscle bellies appear of good quality without signs of fatty atrophy.
The left hip articular cartilage appears well maintained. No subchondral oedema or cystic change. There are therefore no significant left hip joint degenerative changes. There are no areas of marrow oedema to suggest transient…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read Brooks and Australia Postal Corporation 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
- [2010] AATA 812
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issue was whether the respondent was justified in ceasing liability for the accepted condition, given the change in the description of the condition in the reviewable decision. The Tribunal considered whether the respondent's decision to reconsider the diagnosis and conclude that the condition had ceased was reasonable. It also examined the consistency of the decision-making process with the statutory framework under the Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988 (Cth).
The Tribunal held that the decision to cease liability was unreasonable, as the respondent had not provided adequate reasons for reconsidering the diagnosis and determining that the incapacity had ceased. The Tribunal found that the description of the accepted condition in the reviewable decision was materially different from the original acceptance of liability, which undermined the respondent's decision. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the decision and ruled that the Australian Postal Corporation must continue to pay compensation to the applicant for the aggravation of greater trochanteric bursitis of the left hip.
The Tribunal’s decision highlighted the importance of consistency in decision-making and adherence to statutory requirements when reviewing workers’ compensation claims. By setting aside the respondent’s decision and reinstating the applicant’s entitlement to compensation, the Tribunal ensured that the applicant’s rights under the Act were upheld.
Orders
Orders of the court
The Tribunal sets aside the decision under review and substitutes its decision that the Australian Postal Corporation continues to be liable to pay compensation to the applicant under the Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988 (Cth) in respect of incapacity for the aggravation of greater trochanteric bursitis left hip.
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.