Cremona and Comcare (Compensation)

This matter concerned an appeal by the Applicant, Ms Cremona, against a decision by Comcare. The dispute centred on whether certain physical treatments, specifically massage, physiotherapy, and podiatry, constituted "therapeutic treatment" and were "reasonable in the circumstances" for the Applicant's previously accepted injury, for which Comcare was liable to compensate. The decision was made by Senior Member T. Tavoularis.

The legal issues before the court were whether the physical treatments sought by the Applicant qualified as "therapeutic treatment" under the relevant legislation, and whether these treatments were reasonable in the Applicant's specific circumstances. The court was also required to consider whether there was a "good reason" to re-litigate issues that had been the subject of a previous determination by the Tribunal, noting that the current application pre-dated that previous decision.

The Senior Member reasoned that while the Applicant might derive a minor, short-term benefit from the treatments, the evidence indicated that the physical treatments were actively hindering her recovery and had led to a dependency. Consequently, the treatments were found not to be "therapeutic" in nature, nor were they considered reasonable in the Applicant's circumstances. The Senior Member concluded that Comcare was not liable under section 16 of the Act to compensate the Applicant for these treatments. The decision under review was affirmed.