Brown v Toll Transport Pty Ltd - [2025] NSWPIC 346

CERTIFICATE OF DETERMINATION OF MEMBER
CITATION:	Brown v Toll Transport Pty Ltd [2025] NSWPIC 346
APPLICANT:	Nathan Brown
RESPONDENT:	Toll Transport Pty Ltd
MEMBER:	Mitchell Strachan
DATE OF DECISION:	17 July 2025
DATE OF AMENDMENT:	27 August 2025
CATCHWORDS:	WORKERS COMPENSATION - Workers Compensation Act 1987; section 4(b)(ii); primary psychological injury being an aggravation of secondary psychological condition resulting from earlier physical injury; whether primary psychological injury ongoing; incapacity; whether applicant has current work capacity with respect to accepted injury to right eye and secondary psychological condition; Held – the applicant sustained a primary psychological injury however the effects of that injury had ceased; as the effects of the injury had ceased prior to the commencement of the claim for weekly compensation no award is made with respect to this injury; the applicant has no current work capacity with respect to the accepted injury to their right eye and consequential psychological condition; the respondent to pay the applicant weekly compensation.
DETERMINATIONS MADE:	The Commission determines: 1. The applicant sustained a primary psychological injury however the effects of that injury had ceased by 2 April 2024. As the effects of the injury had ceased prior to the commencement of the claim for weekly compensation no award is made with respect to weekly compensation with respect to this injury. 2. The applicant has no current work capacity with respect to the accepted injury to his right eye and consequential psychological condition. 3. The respondent to pay the applicant weekly compensation as follows: (a) at the rate of $2,523 per week from 20 January 2025 to 30 March 2025, and (b) at the rate of $2,569.60 per week from 1 April 2025 to date and continuing. 4. The parties have liberty to apply within 14 days should further orders be necessary with respect to the payment of weekly compensation. A brief statement is attached setting out the Commission’s reasons for the determination.

STATEMENT OF REASONS

BACKGROUND

The applicant sustained an injury to his right eye on 11 October 2022 when he rubbed his eye with his hand that had been contaminated with ammonium nitrate. As a result of this injury, the applicant also suffers from a secondary psychological condition. Liability with respect to both injuries is accepted however the extent of incapacity resulting from those injuries is in dispute in these proceedings, the respondent having made a work capacity decision reducing his weekly entitlement to nil.
Additionally, the applicant alleges that following his return to work with the respondent he developed a separate primary psychological injury resulting from what he perceived as bullying behaviour towards him by colleagues and that he had a separate incapacity as a result of that injury. Liability for the separate primary psychological injury is disputed by the respondent.

ISSUES FOR DETERMINATION

The applicant is seeking weekly compensation from 20 January 2025 under s 37 of the Workers Compensation Act 1987 (the 1987 Act).
The parties agree that the applicant’s indexed pre-injury average weekly earnings (PIAWE) for the…

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.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Brown v Toll Transport 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

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2025] NSWPIC 346
Decision Date: 17 July 2025

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Brown v Toll Transport Pty Ltd involved a dispute regarding workers' compensation. The applicant, Brown, claimed compensation from Toll Transport Pty Ltd for a primary psychological injury, which he argued was an aggravation of a secondary psychological condition resulting from an earlier physical injury. The matter was heard in the Workers Compensation Commission of Victoria.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the applicant's primary psychological injury was ongoing. A further issue was whether the applicant had current work capacity with respect to the accepted injury to his right eye and the secondary psychological condition. The court had to determine if Brown was entitled to weekly compensation payments from the date of the claim.

The court concluded that Brown had sustained a primary psychological injury, however, the effects of that injury had ceased prior to the commencement of the claim for weekly compensation. Therefore, the court held that no award should be made with respect to the primary psychological injury. Additionally, the court found that Brown had no current work capacity with respect to the accepted injury to his right eye and the consequential psychological condition. The court ordered Toll Transport Pty Ltd to pay Brown weekly compensation in relation to the accepted injury to his right eye and the secondary psychological condition.

Orders