Carthy v Simon Blackwood (Workers' Compensation Regulator)

[2014] QIRC 73

QUEENSLAND INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COMMISSION

CITATION: 

Carthy v Simon Blackwood (Workers' Compensation

Regulator) [2014] QIRC 073

PARTIES: 

Carthy, George

(Appellant)

v

Simon Blackwood (Workers' Compensation
Regulator)

(Respondent)

CASE NO: 

WC/2013/338

PROCEEDING: 

Appeal against a decision of Simon Blackwood

(Workers' Compensation Regulator)

DELIVERED ON: 

1 May 2014

HEARING DATE: 

23 April 2014

24 April 2014

MEMBER: 

Deputy President Kaufman

ORDERS : 

1.	The Appeal is dismissed.
2.	The Decision of the Regulator is affirmed.
3.	Costs reserved.

CATCHWORDS: 

WORKERS' COMPENSATION - APPEAL AGAINST DECISION - whether injury arose out of, or in the course of employment - whether employment was a significant contributing factor - balance of probabilities - appeal dismissed

CASES: 

Workers' Compensation and Rehabilitation Act

2003, s 32

APPEARANCES: 

Mr G. Carthy, the Appellant, in person
Mr N. Jarro, Counsel directly instructed by Simon

Blackwood (Workers' Compensation Regulator)

"… I've indicated to you in the course of the debate with you what findings I've been

prepared to make and what findings I've made. And that's left as the only issue upon which I haven't made a finding, the question of whether or not work - the work was a significant contributing factor. Just to repeat, I found that you're - I accept that you're a worker for the purposes of the legislation. I accept that you suffered - sustained a personal injury. I accept that that injury arose out of or in the course of your employment and I've indicated why; I don't need to repeat myself. And I need to find and be satisfied on the balance of probabilities that the - that the employment is a significant contributing factor to that injury and I need to do that on the balance of probabilities. And Mr Carthy, I'm afraid I just can't get there. I'm - I think the - and I find that the injury was probably - that the employment was probably a contributing factor, but in my view, you haven't been able to persuade me on the balance of the probabilities that it was a significant contributing factor, and those passages in Dr Ward's report to which I was just taken are an example of the - of my reasoning that's consistent with the other medical evidence. It may well be that the work was a contributing factor, but, in my view, on the evidence that I've heard, the significant factor was the underlying problems with your knees and that was perhaps brought on at work and may well have contributed to it, but not - not in a - I'm not satisfied that it was a significant contributing factor and for that reason I need to rule against you and affirm the decision of the Regulator. "

Report on Decision (as edited)

In giving his decision from the Bench on 24 April 2014, Deputy President Kaufman stated: