Comcare v Chambers

Comcare appealed against a decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal which held that Mr Chambers' employment had significantly contributed to both his psychological condition and the aggravation of his epilepsy. The Tribunal found that Mr Chambers’ employment with ASIC had substantially contributed to his psychological condition, and that stress from his employment had contributed to the aggravation of his epilepsy. Comcare contended that the Tribunal had erred in finding that his employment had contributed to the aggravation of his epilepsy to a significant degree, and that ASIC had taken reasonable administrative action in a reasonable manner in respect of Mr Chambers’ employment.

The court considered whether the Tribunal had erred in finding that Mr Chambers’ employment had contributed to the aggravation of his epilepsy to a significant degree. The court noted that the definition of 'disease' in the relevant legislation includes an ailment and an aggravation of such an ailment. The court found that the Tribunal had not erred in finding that Mr Chambers’ employment had contributed to the aggravation of his epilepsy to a significant degree as it was sufficient to find for Mr Chambers on this issue. The court also considered whether ASIC had taken reasonable administrative action in a reasonable manner in respect of Mr Chambers’ employment. The court found that the Tribunal had not erred in finding that ASIC had taken reasonable administrative action in a reasonable manner in respect of Mr Chambers’ employment.

The appeal was dismissed, and the matter was stood over for a further case management hearing.