Johnson and Commonwealth Bank of Australia (Compensation)

This matter concerned an application by Ms. Johnson against the Commonwealth Bank of Australia regarding ongoing liability for compensation for a work-related injury. The dispute centred on whether Ms. Johnson continued to suffer from a work-related injury to her right knee and whether certain expenses claimed were reasonable and payable under the relevant legislation. The decision was made by Ms. A E Burke AO, Member, of the Tribunal.

The legal issues before the Tribunal included determining whether Ms. Johnson's right knee condition continued to be contributed to by her employment with the Commonwealth Bank of Australia. The Tribunal was also required to consider the reasonableness of various expenses claimed by Ms. Johnson, including travel costs between home and work, parking, and medical treatments such as weight control and pain management, in light of whether these expenses were directly related to the accepted work injury and whether they constituted reasonable medical treatment under section 16 of the *Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988* (SRC Act).

The Tribunal found that Ms. Johnson's fall at work on 20 June 2016 resulted in an injury to her right knee, and that subsequent left heel and left knee pain were associated with this original injury. The Tribunal considered that Ms. Johnson's right knee injury had been significantly contributed to, aggravated, accelerated, and exacerbated by her employment. The Tribunal distinguished between an "injury simpliciter" and a "disease" under the SRC Act, noting that an injury simpliciter requires the injury to arise out of, or in the course of, employment, whereas a disease requires a significant degree of contribution from employment. The Tribunal applied the principles from *Canute v Comcare* regarding the definition of "injury" under the Act, clarifying that compensation is payable for the injury itself, not merely the resultant impairment, and that an employee can sustain more than one injury.

Ultimately, the Tribunal determined that while Ms. Johnson's right knee condition continued to be contributed to by her work, her left heel and left knee injuries did not continue to be contributed to a significant degree by her employment. Consequently, under section 43(1)(a) of the *Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975*, the Tribunal set aside the previous decision and substituted it with a decision that Ms. Johnson continued to be entitled to reasonable medical expenses in respect of her accepted right knee injuries from 29 October 2021, pursuant to section 16 of the SRC Act.