Compagnon v Demo Corp Pty Ltd - [2021] NSWPIC 353

CERTIFICATE OF DETERMINATION OF MEMBER
CITATION:	Compagnon v Demo Corp Pty Ltd [2021] NSWPIC 353
APPLICANT:	Marco Compagnon
RESPONDENT:	Demo Corp Pty Ltd
MEMBER:	Cameron Burge
DATE OF DECISION:	16 September 2021
CATCHWORDS:	WORKERS COMPENSATION - Claim for permanent impairment compensation, weekly compensation and medical expenses surrounding accepted lumbar spine injury; parties agree permanent impairment compensation to be paid in accordance with Medical Assessment Certificate dated 25 May 2021; weekly payments; parties cannot agree on applicant’s pre-injury earnings despite applicant producing taxation records showing relevant earnings; respondent did not produce any records as to applicant’s wages; preinjury earnings determined in accordance with amount claimed by applicant; capacity also in dispute; Held - applicant totally incapacitated for period claimed, save for a closed period of partial incapacity; respondent ordered to pay applicant weekly benefits and reasonably necessary medical expenses.
DETERMINATIONS MADE:	1. Leave is granted by consent to amend the name of the respondent to Demo Corp Pty Ltd. 2. The respondent is to pay the applicant permanent impairment compensation in respect of a 17% Whole Person Impairment in accordance with the Medical Assessment Certificate of Dr Mastroianni, dated 25 May 2021. 3. Leave is granted to the applicant to amend the claim for weekly benefits to the period of 10 May 2014 to 5 November 2016 inclusive. 4. The applicant suffered an injury to his lumbar spine with associated scarring due to the nature and conditions of his employment with the respondent, with a deemed date of injury of 9 May 2014. 5. At the time of the applicant's injury, his pre-injury average weekly earnings were $1,249.25 per week. 6. The applicant was totally incapacitated for employment as a result of his workplace injury for the following periods: 10 May 2014 to 1 February 2015; and 2 June 2015 to 5 November 2016 inclusive. 7. The applicant had partial incapacity for employment for the period 2 February 2015 to 1 June 2015, in that he was fit to work 20 hours per week on selected duties and had capacity in that period to earn $600 per week. 8. The respondent is to pay the applicant weekly compensation pursuant to section 36 of the Workers Compensation Act 1987 at the rate of $1,186.79 per week for the period of 10 May 2014 to 9 August 2014. 9. The respondent is to pay the applicant pursuant to section 37 of the Workers Compensation Act 1987 weekly compensation as follows: (a) at the rate of $999.40 per week for the period of 10 August 2014 to 1 February 2015 and from 3 June 2015 to 5 November 2016; (b) at the rate of $399.40 per week for the period 2 February 2015 to 2 June 2015, and (c) The respondent is to pay the applicant's reasonably necessary medical and treatment expenses pursuant to section 60 of the Workers Compensation Act 1987.

STATEMENT OF REASONS

BACKGROUND

On 24 May 2021, Medical Assessor Dr Mastroianni issued a Medical Assessment Certificate (MAC) with respect to…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Compagnon v Demo Corp Pty Ltd

Details

AGLC: Compagnon v Demo Corp Pty Ltd [2021] NSWPIC 353
Case: [2021] NSWPIC 353
Decision Date: 16 September 2021

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of Compagnon v Demo Corp Pty Ltd, the applicant, Compagnon, sought compensation for a lumbar spine injury sustained during employment with Demo Corp. The dispute centred on the calculation of permanent impairment compensation, weekly compensation, and medical expenses. The court addressed the disagreement between the parties regarding the applicant's pre-injury earnings and the extent of their incapacity following the injury. The Court of Appeal was tasked with determining these matters, particularly in light of the parties' inability to agree on the applicant's pre-injury earnings despite the applicant providing taxation records.

The court had to resolve two primary legal issues. The first was the determination of the applicant's pre-injury earnings, given the lack of evidence from the respondent regarding the applicant's wages. The second was the extent of the applicant's incapacity following the injury, as the parties could not agree on this matter. The court needed to consider the evidence presented, including the Medical Assessment Certificate dated 25 May 2021, to make informed decisions on these issues.

The court found that the parties had agreed on the permanent impairment compensation, which would be paid in accordance with the Medical Assessment Certificate. Regarding pre-injury earnings, the court accepted the amount claimed by the applicant as the respondent did not produce any records to contradict this. The court determined that the applicant was totally incapacitated for the period claimed, except for a brief period of partial incapacity. Based on this finding, the court ordered the respondent to pay the applicant weekly benefits and reasonably necessary medical expenses.

The court's decision concluded with specific orders for the respondent to pay the applicant's weekly benefits and medical expenses. The court did not alter the agreed amount for permanent impairment compensation but ensured that the respondent fulfilled its obligations regarding the other aspects of the compensation claim.

Orders