Diehm and TNT Australia Pty Ltd (Compensation)

The applicant sought workers' compensation for a myocardial infarction, claiming it occurred on 14 September 2015. The respondent initially determined they were not liable under section 14 of the *Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1998* (Cth), a decision that was subsequently affirmed upon reconsideration. The applicant then applied to the Tribunal for a review of this determination.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the respondent was liable to compensate the applicant for his myocardial infarction. This required the Tribunal to determine if the condition could be classified as an 'injury (other than a disease)' under section 5A of the Act, or as a 'disease' under section 5B of the Act.

The Tribunal considered the definitions of 'injury' and 'disease' within the Act. It noted that a 'disease' requires a significant contribution from employment, whereas an 'injury (other than a disease)' must arise out of, or in the course of, employment. The Tribunal found no evidence that the applicant's coronary heart disease condition, which led to the myocardial infarction, was contributed to to a significant degree by his employment. While acknowledging the applicant's risk factors, including a family history and long-term smoking, the medical evidence indicated the condition would have progressed to a myocardial infarction regardless of employment. Therefore, the condition did not meet the criteria for a 'disease' under the Act. Furthermore, the evidence suggested the myocardial infarction commenced when the applicant was not at work, thus not satisfying the requirement for an 'injury (other than a disease)' to arise out of, or in the course of, employment.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the respondent's decision, finding that the applicant's myocardial infarction did not qualify as an injury or disease under the relevant provisions of the Act.