| CERTIFICATE OF DETERMINATION OF MEMBER | |
| CITATION: | COA v BPI [2025] NSWPIC 295 |
| APPLICANT: | COA |
| RESPONDENT: | BPI |
| MEMBER: | Fiona Seaton |
| DATE OF DECISION: | 25 June 2025 |
CATCHWORDS: | Workers Compensation Act 1987; claim for weekly benefits and medical or related expenses resulting from alleged psychological injury; disputed whether injury arose out of the applicant’s employment and the employment was a substantial contributing factor considered; Held – the applicant sustained a psychological injury that arose out of his employment and the employment was a substantial contributing factor to the injury; orders for payment of weekly benefits and medical or related expenses resulting from the injury; publishable decision to be de-identified in accordance with rule 132 of the Personal Injury Commission Rules 2021. |
| DETERMINATIONS MADE: | 1. The Application to Resolve a Dispute is amended to include in the Weekly Benefits Compensation section the pre-injury average weekly earnings (PIAWE) amount of $1,502. 2. The applicant sustained a psychological injury on 26 October 2024 that arose out of his employment with the respondent in accordance with s 4(a) of the Workers Compensation Act 1987 (1987 Act). 3. The applicant’s employment with the respondent was a substantial contributing factor to his psychological injury in accordance with s 9A of the 1987 Act. 4. The respondent is to pay the applicant weekly benefits at the PIAWE rate of $1,502 for the following periods: (a) 26 October 2024 to 25 January 2025 at $1,426.90 per week pursuant to s 36(1) of the 1987 Act, and (b) 26 January 2025 to 2 February 2025 at $1,201.60 per week pursuant to s 37(1) of the 1987 Act. 5. The respondent is to pay the applicant’s reasonably necessary medical or related expenses resulting from the injury on 26 October 2024 pursuant to s 60 of the 1987 Act on production of invoices, receipts and/or Medicare notice of charge. 6. The publishable decision is to be de-identified in accordance with r 132 of the Personal Injury Commission Rules 2021, including de-identification of the applicant, the applicant’s sister and the CEO of the respondent. |
STATEMENT OF REASONS
BACKGROUND
The applicant [COA] was employed by the respondent [BPI] as an unpaid Marketing Intern, Marketing Officer and Finance/Student Support Coordinator between November 2022 and October 2024.
The applicant’s sister who was also employed by the respondent alleges she was sexually assaulted by the chief executive officer (CEO) of the respondent while on a business trip in Perth on about 26 October 2024.
The applicant was advised of the incident by his sister and flew to Perth on 26 October 2024. He met with his sister and two other owners of the respondent who had travelled to Perth over the next two days due to the incident.
As a result of the incident the applicant alleges he suffered a psychological injury. He has been diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder and adjustment disorders.
The applicant claimed weekly benefits and medical or related expenses on
12 November 2024 supported by a Certificate of Capacity dated 7 November 2024…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read COA v Bpi 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
- [2025] NSWPIC 295
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issues for the court to decide were whether COA sustained a psychological injury and, if so, whether this injury arose out of his employment and was substantially contributed to by it. The court had to consider the evidence presented regarding COA’s work environment, the nature of the injury, and whether there were sufficient links between the injury and his employment. The court also needed to determine if the injury met the statutory criteria for compensation under the Act.
The court found that COA did sustain a psychological injury that arose out of his employment, and that the employment was a substantial contributing factor to the injury. The court considered the evidence presented by both parties and the applicable legal standards, concluding that the criteria for compensation were satisfied. The court’s reasoning involved a detailed analysis of the evidence and the relevant statutory provisions. Consequently, the court made orders for COA to receive weekly benefits and payment for medical or related expenses resulting from the injury. The decision is to be published with identifying details removed in accordance with the relevant rules.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
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.