Contreras and Australian Postal Corporation (Compensation)

This matter concerned an application for compensation by the Applicant against the Australian Postal Corporation (the Respondent). The Applicant sought compensation for bilateral lateral epicondylitis, chronic pain syndrome, major depression, C5-6 disc bulge and canal stenosis with cord compression, and bilateral shoulder pain. The Respondent initially accepted liability for the bilateral lateral epicondylitis but disputed whether this condition caused chronic pain syndrome and contributed significantly to major depression, and whether the major depression was caused by the claims process. The Respondent also disputed that the C5-6 disc bulge, canal stenosis with cord compression, and bilateral shoulder pain were work-related. The decision was made by Senior Member Mrs J C Kelly.

The legal issues before the court were to determine whether the Respondent had a present liability to pay compensation for the Applicant's various medical conditions. Specifically, the court was required to ascertain whether the bilateral lateral epicondylitis, accepted as work-related, caused chronic pain syndrome and significantly contributed to major depression. Furthermore, the court had to determine if the major depression was a consequence of the claims process itself. Finally, the court needed to decide whether the C5-6 disc bulge and canal stenosis with cord compression, and bilateral shoulder pain were work-related injuries for which the Respondent was liable to pay compensation.

The Senior Member found that while the Applicant suffered from bilateral lateral epicondylitis, the evidence did not support the claim that this condition caused chronic pain syndrome or significantly contributed to major depression in the period claimed. The Applicant's medical records prior to February 2016 did not indicate work-related arm or wrist pain, and the initial presentation of pain was described as mild soreness. The Senior Member inferred that the Applicant's perception of bullying in relation to his claim, following the lodging of his initial claim and the manager's supplementary statement, likely contributed to his psychological distress. Regarding the C5-6 disc bulge, canal stenosis with cord compression, and bilateral shoulder pain, the Senior Member concluded, based on the evidence of Associate Professor McGill and Associate Professor Fearnside, that these conditions were not work-related.

Consequently, the Senior Member affirmed each of the reviewable decisions. This meant that the Respondent was found not to have present liability to pay compensation for chronic pain syndrome, major depression as a consequence of the work injury, the C5-6 disc bulge and canal stenosis with cord compression, or the bilateral shoulder pain. The Respondent's liability was limited to the accepted bilateral lateral epicondylitis.