CXFD and Comcare (Compensation)

This matter concerned an application by CXFD against Comcare, heard by Senior Member Mrs J C Kelly. The applicant sought compensation for Major Depressive Disorder with Anxious Distress and Hypertension, alleging these conditions were contributed to, to a significant degree, by his employment. The applicant also claimed to suffer from tinnitus, allegedly caused by air conditioner noise, and sought compensation for this condition as well.

The primary legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the applicant's Major Depressive Disorder with Anxious Distress and Hypertension constituted an injury suffered as a result of reasonable administrative action taken in a reasonable manner, and whether his tinnitus was contributed to, to a significant degree, by his employment. The applicant had raised numerous complaints regarding the administrative action taken against him, including allegations of unreasonableness, lack of confidentiality, denial of procedural fairness, and humiliation.

The Tribunal considered the administrative action taken on 6 March 2019, which involved the applicant being approached at his desk, informed of his suspension from duties, and provided with letters detailing a Code of Conduct investigation and potential reassignment or suspension. He was escorted from the premises and directed to remain out of the workplace. The Tribunal applied the principle that whether administrative action is reasonable and taken in a reasonable manner requires an objective consideration of the circumstances, meaning the action must not be irrational, absurd, or ridiculous, and must be tolerable and fair. The Tribunal noted that any unreasonableness must arise from the action itself, not merely the employee's perception of it.

The Tribunal set aside the decision under review concerning the applicant's Major Depressive Disorder with Anxious Distress and Hypertension, finding that the administrative action taken was not reasonable and not taken in a reasonable manner. However, the Tribunal affirmed the decision under review regarding the applicant's claim for tinnitus, finding that it was not contributed to, to a significant degree, by his employment.