Flook v JL Stewart & Sons Pty Ltd - [2022] NSWPIC 116

CERTIFICATE OF DETERMINATION OF MEMBER
CITATION:	Flook v JL Stewart & Sons Pty Ltd [2022] NSWPIC 116
APPLICANT:	Matthew Flook
RESPONDENT:	JL Stewart & Sons Pty Ltd
MEMBER:	Jacqueline Snell
DATE OF DECISION:	22 March 2022
CATCHWORDS:	WORKERS COMPENSATION - The applicant claims permanent impairment compensation resulting from injury sustained to his left upper extremity, right upper extremity, cervical spine and scarring in the course of his employment with the respondent; the respondent disputes the applicant’s alleged injury to the cervical spine and the level of impairment the applicant sustained resulting from injury sustained in the course of his employment with the respondent; Held– the applicant sustained injury to his cervical spine in the course of his employment with the respondent; the applicant’s claim for permanent impairment resulting from injury sustained to his left upper extremity, right upper extremity, cervical spine and scarring in the course of his employment with the respondent is remitted to the President for referral to a Medical Assessor for assessment of whole person impairment.
DETERMINATIONS MADE:	1. The applicant sustained injury to his cervical spine on 26 June 2014 in the course of his employment with the respondent and the applicant’s employment with the respondent was a substantial contributing factor to injury. 2. The applicant’s claim for permanent impairment compensation payable under s 66 of the Workers Compensation Act 1987 resulting from injury sustained to his left upper extremity (left shoulder), right upper extremity (right shoulder), cervical spine and scarring, as agreed or determined by the Commission, with date of injury of 26 June 2014, is to be remitted to the President for referral to a Medical Assessor for assessment of whole person impairment. The following documents are admitted by consent and are to be forwarded to the Medical Assessor with this Certificate of Determination and Statement of Reasons: (a) Application to Resolve a Dispute and attached documents; (b) Reply and attached documents, and (c) Application to Admit Late Documents dated 27 January 2022 lodged on behalf of the respondent and attached documents.

STATEMENT OF REASONS

BACKGROUND

At the date of injury the subject of these proceedings, the applicant, Matthew Flook (Mr Flook) was employed by the respondent, JL Stewart & Sons Pty Ltd (JL Stewart & Sons), working as a delivery driver. Mr Flook commenced employment with JL Stewart & Sons in late 2013. Mr Flook’s employment with JL Stewart & Sons is now terminated, and he remains unemployed. Mr Flook is currently 44 years of age.
Mr Flook alleges that on 26 June 2014 he sustained injury in the course of his employment with JL Stewart & Sons.
In previous proceedings in the Workers Compensation Commission (Matter No. 5924/15) the circumstances of injury are described in the following terms:
“on 26 June 2014, the applicant injured his left shoulder in the course of performing his work duties as a delivery driver. Whilst performing a particular delivery, the applicant was required to stand on the side step of the truck’s trailer, bend forward at…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Flook v JL Stewart & Sons Pty Ltd and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2022] NSWPIC 116
Decision Date: 22 March 2022

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of Flook v JL Stewart & Sons Pty Ltd, the applicant sought compensation for permanent impairment caused by injuries to his left upper extremity, right upper extremity, cervical spine, and scarring, which he alleged occurred during the course of his employment with the respondent. The respondent contested the applicant's claim regarding the injury to the cervical spine and the degree of impairment resulting from the injuries sustained during employment. The matter was heard and determined by the relevant tribunal, which was required to adjudicate on the validity of the applicant's claims and the extent of his impairment.

The primary legal issues before the tribunal were whether the applicant had indeed sustained an injury to his cervical spine during his employment and, if so, the degree of permanent impairment attributable to the injuries. The tribunal had to assess the credibility of the evidence provided by the applicant and the respondent, and determine whether the injuries were work-related. The tribunal also needed to decide on the appropriate level of compensation to be awarded for the alleged impairments.

The tribunal found that the applicant had sustained an injury to his cervical spine during his employment with the respondent. The tribunal held that the applicant’s claim for permanent impairment due to injuries to his left upper extremity, right upper extremity, cervical spine, and scarring should be remitted to the President for referral to a Medical Assessor for a comprehensive assessment of the whole person impairment. This decision ensures that the applicant's claim is thoroughly evaluated by an appropriate expert, providing a more accurate determination of the impairment and corresponding compensation.

In light of the findings, the tribunal ordered that the applicant's claim for permanent impairment be remitted to the President for referral to a Medical Assessor for assessment of whole person impairment. This order ensures that the applicant's claim receives the necessary expert evaluation, providing a more accurate determination of the impairment and corresponding compensation.

Orders