GREGORY KATTERNS and COMCARE

[2003] AATA 422

Administrative

Appeals

Tribunal

 

DECISION AND REASONS FOR DECISION [2003] 422

ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL      )

)           No Q2002/1025

GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE DIVISION		)
Re		GREGORY KATTERNS

Applicant

And COMCARE

Respondent

DECISION

Tribunal Mr R G Kenny, Member

Date9 May 2003

PlaceBrisbane

Decision The Tribunal affirms the decision under review. 

....................(Sgd)....................

R G Kenny
  Member

CATCHWORDS

WORKER’S COMPENSATION – injury occurring travelling from military function –– whether notice of injury given as soon as practicable – whether notice deemed to have been given – whether prejudice to respondent - whether any failure to give notice due to ignorance, mistake or other reasonable cause – whether injury occurred in the course of employment – whether travelling to place of normal residence – whether selected route substantially increased the risk of sustaining an injury when compared with a more direct route

Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988 (Cth) ss 4, 6, 53

Comcare v Luck (1999) 29 AAR 403
Re Tierney and Reserve Bank of Australia (1988) 15 ALD 534
Re Willis and Australian Telecommunications Commission (1989) 19 ALD 665
Re Harbutt and Department of Defence (1998) 51 ALD 159
Commonwealth v Connors (1989) 86 ALR 247
Banks v Comcare [1996] FCA 382
Vetter v Lake Macquarie City Council (2001) 202 CLR 439

REASONS FOR DECISION

9 May 2003 Mr R G Kenny, Member     

Background

1.       On 15 January 2001, Gregory Katterns (the applicant) completed a “Claim for Rehabilitation and Compensation” for injuries which he described as “head, neck, (whiplash) and lower back injury from vehicle accident”.. He stated in that form that the injuries occurred on 18 August 1990 at 2300 hours when he was involved in a vehicle accident which happened after he attended a mess function associated with his service as a member of the Australian Army Reserve.

2.       On 5 February 2001, a delegate with the Military Compensation and Rehabilitation Service determined, in accordance with the terms of the Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988 (the Act), that the claim should be disallowed and, on 28 February 2001, another delegate affirmed the initial decision. On 16 March 2001, the applicant sought review of that decision by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (the Tribunal) and the matter is to be determined under the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975.

Appearances

3.       The applicant was represented by Mr E Muir, solicitor. Mr C Clark of counsel appeared on behalf of Comcare (the respondent).

4.       The following material was tendered and taken into evidence:

§exhibit 1:     the T documents (T1-T10);

§exhibit 2:     an affidavit, dated 24 May 2002, by the applicant;

§exhibit 3:     a letter, received by the Tribunal on 27 June 2001, from Tony and Lesley Twigg;

§exhibit 4:     a letter, dated 5 May 2001, from Hans Weiss;

§exhibit 5:     a sickness benefit medical certificate dated 23 August 1990;

§exhibit 6:     a map marking the route of the applicant;

§exhibit 7:     a statutory declaration, dated 19 March 2003, by the applicant;

§exhibit 8:     a statement, dated 29 September 2001, by the applicant…