Haskins and Comcare (Compensation)

This matter concerned an application by Ms Janine Haskins for compensation under the *Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988* (Cth) (SRC Act) for a psychological condition. Comcare had denied liability, affirming its earlier determination that it was not liable to pay compensation. Ms Haskins sought a review of Comcare's decision before the Tribunal.

The central legal issue before the Tribunal was whether Ms Haskins's psychological condition, which Comcare conceded was a "disease" contributed to by her employment to a significant degree, was suffered as a result of reasonable administrative action taken in a reasonable manner in respect of her employment. If it was, the condition would be excluded from the definition of "injury" under s 5A of the SRC Act, meaning Comcare would not be liable to pay compensation. The determination of this issue hinged on the events that transpired during a counselling session held on 7 August 2014.

The Tribunal, presided over by Senior Member Dr James Popple, considered the events of the counselling session. While acknowledging that Ms Haskins suffered a psychological condition and that the counselling session was a cause, the Tribunal found that the counselling session constituted reasonable administrative action taken in a reasonable manner. This conclusion was reached after considering the evidence and determining that the Director of Public Prosecutions acted reasonably in addressing a complaint against Ms Haskins, opting for an informal resolution process that was the least disadvantageous option available. Consequently, the exclusion in s 5A of the SRC Act applied.

Comcare's decision of 27 May 2015 to affirm its determination that it was not liable to pay compensation to Ms Haskins was affirmed by the Tribunal.