| CERTIFICATE OF DETERMINATION OF MEMBER | |
| CITATION: | Geale v KJR Piping Pty Ltd [2025] NSWPIC 307 |
| APPLICANT: | Geale |
| RESPONDENT: | KJR Piping Pty Ltd |
| MEMBER: | Karen Garner |
| DATE OF DECISION: | 1 July 2025 |
| CATCHWORDS: | WORKERS COMPENSATION - Workers Compensation Act 1987; claim for permanent impairment lump sum compensation pursuant to section 66; accepted injury to bilateral knees, bilateral elbows, right shoulder and scarring, left shoulder and scarring; whether applicant sustained injury pursuant to sections 4(a) and 9A to the cervical spine, lumbar spine and nervous system; Held – not satisfied on the balance of probability that the applicant sustained injury pursuant to sections 4(a) and 9A to the cervical spine, lumbar spine and nervous system; matter remitted to the President to be referred to a Medical Assessor for assessment of whole person impairment (WPI) in respect of the accepted injuries. |
| DETERMINATIONS MADE: | 1. The Commission is not satisfied on the balance of probability that the applicant sustained any of the following injuries pursuant to ss 4(a) and 9A of the Workers Compensation Act 1987 (the 1987 Act), being: (a) injury on 14 August 2013, to his: (i) cervical spine; (ii) lumbar spine; (iii) nervous system, and (b) injury on 8 October 2015, to his: (i) cervical spine; (ii) lumbar spine; (iii) nervous system, (together referred to as the “disputed injuries”). The Commission orders: 2. Award for the respondent in relation to the disputed injuries. 3. The matter is remitted to the President to be referred to a Medical Assessor for an assessment as follows: Date of injury: 14 August 2013. Body parts: left lower extremity (knee); right lower extremity (knee); left upper extremity (elbow); right upper, extremity (elbow, shoulder), and TEMSKI/scarring (right shoulder, left knee, right knee). Method: whole person impairment. Date of injury: 8 October 2015. Body parts: left upper extremity (elbow, shoulder);right upper extremity (elbow), and TEMSKI/scarring (left shoulder, left elbow, right elbow). Method: whole person impairment 4. The materials to be referred to the Medical Assessor are to include: (a) Application to Resolve a Dispute (ARD) and attached documents, and (b) Reply to ARD and attached documents, noting that by agreement between the parties, the following reports are admitted into evidence and to be considered for the purposes of history only: (i) reports of Dr Kalnins dated 24 February 2015, 24 March 2015, and (ii) report of Dr Smith dated 7 April 2017; (iii) report of Professor Cunning dated 16 August 2016, and (iv) report of Dr Powell dated 23 September 2019. 5. The parties have liberty to apply, within seven days of the date of this order, in relation to the terms of the referral to a Medical Assessor. |
STATEMENT OF REASONS
BACKGROUND
Geoffrey John Geale (the applicant) was employed by KJR Piping Pty Ltd (the respondent) a sheet metal worker from about 2012 to June 2016.
The applicant has claimed permanent impairment lump sum compensation pursuant to s 66 of the Workers Compensation Act 1987 (the 1987 Act):
(a) in the amount of $146,850…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read Geale v KJR Piping 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
One click creates your free account or signs you in.
By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.
- Case
- [2025] NSWPIC 307
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court was required to determine whether the applicant had sustained the claimed additional injuries. The applicant argued that the injuries to the cervical spine, lumbar spine, and nervous system were a direct result of the accepted injuries and therefore compensable. The respondent contended that there was insufficient evidence to establish these additional injuries and that they were not related to the accepted injuries.
The court found that the applicant had not satisfied the balance of probability requirement to establish the claimed additional injuries. The court noted that while the applicant had presented evidence of pain and discomfort, this did not necessarily correlate with the specific injuries claimed under sections 4(a) and 9A. The court concluded that the matter should be remitted to the President to be referred to a Medical Assessor for an assessment of whole person impairment in respect of the accepted injuries. The court did not find it necessary to consider the claim for additional injuries at this stage.
The final orders of the court were that the matter be remitted to the President to be referred to a Medical Assessor for assessment of whole person impairment in respect of the accepted injuries to bilateral knees, bilateral elbows, right shoulder and scarring, and left shoulder and scarring. The claim for injuries to the cervical spine, lumbar spine, and nervous system was dismissed for lack of sufficient evidence.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.