Doorbar and Comcare (Compensation)

This matter concerned an application by Ms Janine Doorbar (the Applicant) for review of a decision by Comcare (the Respondent) to cease her compensation payments for lateral epicondylitis and chronic regional pain syndrome. The Applicant had been employed by the Department of Defence since 2002, where a significant part of her role involved repetitive keyboard and mouse activity. The dispute centred on whether the Applicant's conditions constituted an "injury" under the relevant legislation and, if so, whether her employment contributed to them to a significant degree.

The primary legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the Applicant had suffered an "injury" as defined by section 5A of the *Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988* (Cth) (the Act), specifically a "disease," and if so, whether that disease was contributed to, to a significant degree, by her employment, as required by section 5B of the Act. The Tribunal was also required to consider whether the Applicant's symptoms predated her employment or were caused by factors unrelated to her work, as argued by the Respondent.

The Tribunal accepted the Applicant's evidence in its entirety, finding her to be a truthful witness. It considered the definitions of "injury" and "disease" under sections 5A and 5B of the Act, respectively. Section 5A defines an injury to include a disease, while section 5B defines a disease as an ailment contributed to to a "significant degree" (meaning substantially more than material) by employment. The Tribunal noted the Respondent's argument that the Applicant had experienced symptoms of lateral epicondylitis prior to her claimed injury date and that other factors may have contributed to her condition. However, the Tribunal found that the Applicant's evidence regarding the onset and nature of her pain, particularly in relation to her mouse usage, was credible.

The Tribunal set aside Comcare's decision. It was satisfied that the Applicant had suffered an injury within the meaning of the Act, and that her employment had contributed to her condition to a significant degree.