Coad v Tasmania

The Supreme Court of Tasmania, constituted by Wood J, Geason J, and Martin AJ, considered an appeal by the worker, Coad, against a decision of the Workers Rehabilitation and Compensation Tribunal. The dispute concerned the assessment of compensation for multiple injuries sustained by the worker, specifically a physical injury to the cervical spine and a psychiatric injury in the form of post-traumatic stress disorder. The Tribunal had determined that the worker was not entitled to lump sum compensation because neither individual impairment threshold was met.

The central legal issue before the Full Court was whether the Workers Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988 (Tas) permitted the combination of separate physical and psychiatric impairments to meet the statutory threshold for lump sum compensation. The Act stipulated that a worker was not entitled to such compensation unless their whole person impairment from a physical injury was not less than 5%, or from a psychiatric injury was not less than 10%. The worker's cervical spine injury was assessed at 5% whole person impairment, and their post-traumatic stress disorder was assessed at 6% whole person impairment.

The Court reasoned that the Act should be construed beneficially in favour of the worker. It held that the legislative intent was to allow for the aggregation of impairments where the combined effect of multiple injuries resulted in a significant overall impairment, even if individual injuries did not meet their respective thresholds. Applying this principle, the Court determined that the worker's impairments should be combined, resulting in an 11% whole person impairment.

Consequently, the Full Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the Tribunal's decision. The Court ordered that the worker was entitled to lump sum compensation based on the combined whole person impairment of 11%.