de Gail and Comcare (Compensation)

This matter concerned an appeal by the applicant against a decision by Comcare to reject liability for a bilateral lateral epicondylitis condition. The applicant contended that her employment had significantly contributed to this condition.

The court was required to determine whether the applicant's bilateral lateral epicondylitis constituted an injury or disease for the purposes of the *Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988* (Cth), and if so, whether her employment had significantly contributed to its development.

The court found that the applicant's condition was most probably caused by activities related to moving house, relying on contemporaneous medical evidence from general practitioners. These records indicated the applicant reported elbow pain after moving house and mentioned heavy lifting. Expert opinion also supported the view that manual lifting, rather than computer-related actions or extensive handwriting, was more likely to cause such a condition. The court noted that the applicant did not mention any workplace contribution to her condition when she first sought medical attention. Consequently, the court concluded there was no cogent evidence that the applicant's employment had significantly contributed to or aggravated her condition.

The decision under review was affirmed.