Guerrero and FedEx Express Australia Pty Ltd (Compensation)

This matter concerned a review of a decision by the respondent, FedEx Express Australia Pty Ltd, denying compensation to the applicant, Mr Guerrero, under the *Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988* (Cth). The dispute centred on whether Mr Guerrero suffered an injury during the course of his employment and, if so, whether his employment significantly contributed to or aggravated that injury. The review was heard by Deputy B W Rayment Oam Kc P.

The court was required to determine two primary legal issues: first, whether Mr Guerrero sustained an injury within the meaning of the *Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988* (Cth) during his employment with FedEx Express Australia Pty Ltd; and second, if an injury was found, whether it was significantly contributed to or aggravated by the conditions of his employment.

The court's reasoning focused on the medical evidence and the nature of Mr Guerrero's work. While there was some discrepancy in the historical accounts of the incident, particularly regarding a "sharp crack" versus a "popping" sound, the medical opinions of Dr Nicholls and Dr Pillemer were ultimately favoured. These opinions were based on the understanding that Mr Guerrero's work in the days leading up to 19 January 2021 involved heavier loads than his previous role as a van courier. Associate Professor Miniter's opinion, which did not account for this increased workload, was therefore considered less persuasive. The court found that the energetic work performed by Mr Guerrero, including on the day of the incident, aggravated his pre-existing degenerative condition, leading to a period of incapacity for work.

Consequently, the reviewable decision was set aside and substituted with a decision that FedEx Express Australia Pty Ltd was liable to compensate Mr Guerrero for his incapacity for work and any associated medical expenses, pursuant to sections 16 and 19 of the *Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988* (Cth).