Howes and Comcare (Compensation)
Case
•
[2016] AATA 448
•30 June 2016
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Howes and Comcare (Compensation) [2016] AATA 448
[2016] AATA 448
30 June 2016
CaseChat Overview and Summary
This matter concerned an appeal by Ms Roseanne Howes against a decision by Comcare to refuse reimbursement for the costs associated with breast reduction surgery. Comcare had accepted liability for certain physical injuries sustained by Ms Howes during her employment, including intervertebral disc disorder of the cervical region and shoulder and upper arm sprain. Ms Howes contended that the weight of her breasts exacerbated her accepted injuries and that the breast reduction surgery was therefore medical treatment obtained in relation to those injuries. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) was required to reconsider the application for review after the Federal Court set aside a previous AAT decision and remitted the matter for reconsideration according to law.
The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the breast reduction surgery constituted "medical treatment" for the purposes of section 16 of the *Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988* (Cth). This required the Tribunal to determine whether the surgery was obtained in relation to Ms Howes's accepted injuries, and if so, whether it was reasonable for her to obtain such treatment in the circumstances. The Tribunal noted that the Federal Court had previously summarised the factual background, including the nature of Ms Howes's accepted injuries and the various medical opinions and treatments she had received, including consultations with surgeons regarding breast reduction.
In its reasoning, the Tribunal accepted that the breast reduction surgery was "medical treatment" as defined by the *SRC Act*. However, the Tribunal found that the surgery was not obtained in relation to Ms Howes's compensable injuries. This conclusion was based on the advice Ms Howes received that the surgery could not have affected the symptoms of her accepted injuries. Consequently, the Tribunal determined that Comcare was not liable under section 16 of the *SRC Act* to pay compensation for the costs associated with the surgery.
The Tribunal affirmed Comcare's decision of 22 April 2013.
The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the breast reduction surgery constituted "medical treatment" for the purposes of section 16 of the *Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988* (Cth). This required the Tribunal to determine whether the surgery was obtained in relation to Ms Howes's accepted injuries, and if so, whether it was reasonable for her to obtain such treatment in the circumstances. The Tribunal noted that the Federal Court had previously summarised the factual background, including the nature of Ms Howes's accepted injuries and the various medical opinions and treatments she had received, including consultations with surgeons regarding breast reduction.
In its reasoning, the Tribunal accepted that the breast reduction surgery was "medical treatment" as defined by the *SRC Act*. However, the Tribunal found that the surgery was not obtained in relation to Ms Howes's compensable injuries. This conclusion was based on the advice Ms Howes received that the surgery could not have affected the symptoms of her accepted injuries. Consequently, the Tribunal determined that Comcare was not liable under section 16 of the *SRC Act* to pay compensation for the costs associated with the surgery.
The Tribunal affirmed Comcare's decision of 22 April 2013.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Employment Law
-
Statutory Interpretation
Legal Concepts
-
Appeal
-
Causation
-
Remedies
-
Statutory Construction
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Most Recent Citation
Howes v Comcare [2016] FCA 1521
Cases Cited
2
Statutory Material Cited
1
Roseanne Howes and Comcare
[2015] AATA 39
Howes v Comcare
[2015] FCA 1078