Drazinic and Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Commission (Compensation)

This matter concerned an application by Mr Drazinic for compensation under the *Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988* (Cth) (DRCA) for various psychiatric and musculoskeletal conditions. The Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Commission opposed the claims. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal was required to determine whether Mr Drazinic had sustained an injury, and if so, whether he was entitled to compensation for panic disorder, adjustment disorder, anxiety disorder, chronic insomnia disorder, hip osteoarthritis, bilateral rotator cuff syndrome, and lumbar spondylosis.

The Tribunal was tasked with assessing whether the claimed psychiatric conditions met the diagnostic criteria of the DSM-5, and whether any symptoms presented were distinct from a diagnosed ailment or disease. For the musculoskeletal conditions, the Tribunal needed to determine the date of onset and whether Mr Drazinic's Army service contributed to these conditions to a "significant degree," as defined by the DRCA. This involved considering factors such as the duration and nature of his employment, any predispositions, and other relevant matters affecting his health.

In its reasoning, the Tribunal found that while Mr Drazinic had experienced symptoms of panic, anxiety, and insomnia since 2000, there was insufficient probative medical evidence to establish diagnoses of panic disorder, adjustment disorder, anxiety disorder, or chronic insomnia disorder within the meaning of the DSM-5. It concluded that these symptoms were attributable to a major depressive disorder with anxiety, for which he was not entitled to compensation under s 14 of the DRCA for the specific conditions claimed. Regarding the musculoskeletal conditions, the Tribunal accepted the diagnoses of hip osteoarthritis, bilateral rotator cuff syndrome, and lumbar spondylosis, but determined the date of onset to be 19 September 2019, not 2000 as asserted by one medical expert. Furthermore, the Tribunal was not satisfied that Mr Drazinic's Army service contributed to these musculoskeletal conditions to a significant degree, noting his brief service, periods of medical care, and restricted duties.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decisions under review. Mr Drazinic was found not to be entitled to compensation for the claimed psychiatric conditions. While musculoskeletal conditions were accepted, their onset date and the degree of contribution from Army service did not meet the threshold for compensation under the DRCA.