Claridge and Comcare (Compensation)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal reviewed a decision concerning a claim for workers' compensation under the Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988 (Cth). The applicant, who represented herself, sought a review of a reconsideration decision regarding her claim for a trigger thumb condition. The respondent, Comcare, was represented by the Australian Government Solicitor.

The central legal issue before the Tribunal was to determine, on the balance of probabilities, whether the applicant's trigger thumb condition was contributed to to a significant degree by her employment with the Commonwealth, thereby establishing a compensable incapacity. The applicant contended that her work, which involved repetitive mouse and keyboard use, caused her condition, while Comcare argued that her employment did not significantly contribute to it.

The Tribunal considered extensive medical evidence, including reports from the applicant's general practitioner, a radiologist, a surgeon, and an occupational physician, as well as material on disease causation. The Tribunal noted that the respondent conceded the applicant suffered an "ailment" as defined by the Act. The applicant's belief that her condition was work-related stemmed from a conversation with a sonographer who suggested repetitive use as a likely cause. However, the Tribunal also considered evidence of a brief, non-specific hand-grabbing incident with her husband that preceded the onset of noticeable thumb pain. The Tribunal acknowledged that risk factors do not definitively establish causation in an individual case and that many conditions are multifactorial.

The Tribunal affirmed the reconsideration decision. It found that while the applicant's employment involved repetitive tasks, the evidence did not establish, on the balance of probabilities, that her employment contributed to her trigger thumb condition to a significant degree.