Carlisle and Comcare (Compensation)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the claim of Mr. Carlisle for compensation from Comcare in respect of permanent impairment and non-economic loss arising from his condition of fibromyalgia.

The central legal issue before the Tribunal was whether Mr. Carlisle's fibromyalgia could be assessed for the purposes of permanent impairment compensation under the *Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988* (Cth) (SRC Act), particularly in light of the Comcare Guide and the American Medical Association Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (AMA5). The Tribunal had to determine if fibromyalgia was a chronic pain condition for the purposes of Principle 12 of the Comcare Guide and, if so, whether its exclusion from assessment under AMA5 precluded the assessment of impairment under section 24(5) of the SRC Act.

The Tribunal reasoned that the Comcare Guide, which incorporates AMA5, does not provide a mechanism for assessing fibromyalgia. While acknowledging fibromyalgia as a chronic pain condition for the purposes of Principle 12, the Tribunal found that the exclusion of fibromyalgia from assessment under AMA5 meant that the degree of permanent impairment could not be assessed in accordance with the requirements of section 24(5) of the SRC Act. Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that Mr. Carlisle was not entitled to compensation for permanent impairment or non-economic loss under sections 24 or 27 of the SRC Act in respect of his fibromyalgia.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision under review, finding that the applicant was not entitled to any amount of compensation under section 24 or section 27 of the SRC Act in respect of the permanent impairment resulting from his condition of fibromyalgia.