Kary v Red Metal Limited

Case [2024] NSWPIC 250


CERTIFICATE OF DETERMINATION OF MEMBER 
CITATION: Kary v Red Metal Limited & Ors [2024] NSWPIC 250
APPLICANT: Lala Kary
FIRST RESPONDENT: Red Metal Limited
SECOND RESPONDENT: Edward Kary
THIRD RESPONDENT: Nicholas Kary
FOURTH RESPONDENT: Alexander Kary
SENIOR MEMBER: Kerry Haddock
DATE OF DECISION: 14 May 2024
CATCHWORDS:

WORKERS COMPENSATION - Workers Compensation Act 1987; claim for lump sum death benefit and interest on lump sum; worker was a geologist who suffered “heart attack injury” while working on a mineral exploration site in the northern territory; liability disputed; applicant claimed that the worker sustained injury in the course of employment/arising out of employment, or in the alternative a “disease injury”; and sections 9a and 9b were satisfied; evidence that the worker was working in temperature exceeding 42 degrees Celsius and had complained about the heat prior to his death; medical evidence that heat was a substantial contributing factor to heart attack injury; consideration of Fisher v Nonconformist Pty Ltd, Secretary, Department of Communities and Justice v Galea, Seltsam Pty Limited v McGuiness, and Kennedy Cleaning v Petkoska; Held – the worker sustained injury in the course of employment, to which employment was a substantial contributing factor; section 9b satisfied; first respondent liable for payment of lump sum death benefit pursuant to section 25(1); matter listed for further preliminary conference to deal with issues relating to dependency, apportionment and interest.

DETERMINATIONS MADE:

The Commission determines:

1.      The worker, Gregory Lawrence Kary, died on 12 December 2018 as a result of injury in the course of his employment with the first respondent.

2. The first respondent is liable for payment of the lump sum death benefit of $798,100, pursuant to s 25(1) of the Workers Compensation Act 1987.

3.     The matter is to be listed for further preliminary conference in order to deal with issues relating to dependency, apportionment, and interest. 

STATEMENT OF REASONS

BACKGROUND

  1. The applicant, Lala Kary (Ms Kary) is the widow of Gregory Lawrence Kary (the worker/Greg), who was employed by the first respondent, Red Metal Limited (Red Metal) as a geologist.  

  2. Alexander Kary, Nicholas Kary, and Edward Kary are the sons of the applicant and the worker. I will refer to them by their given names, to avoid confusion, meaning no disrespect.

  3. The worker, who was employed by Red Metal as a geologist, died on 12 December 2018, from a thrombotic occlusion, while he was working at a camp southeast of Tennant Creek in the Northern Territory (NT).

  4. On 3 July 2019, the applicant completed a Notification Form to Insurance and Care NSW (icare), in which she advised that she was making a claim for death benefits and attached a copy of the Coroner’s Report.

  5. On 7 January 2020, EML, as agent for icare, issued the applicant with a notice pursuant to
    s 78 of the Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998. 

  6. EML advised the applicant that the evidence on file did not support that the worker’s employment with Red Metal gave rise to…

Continue reading Kary v Red Metal Limited

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
Kary v Red Metal Limited [2024] NSWPIC 250
Case
[2024] NSWPIC 250
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of Kary v Red Metal Limited, the applicant, Kary, sought a lump sum death benefit and interest on the lump sum from the respondents, Red Metal Limited and another company. The deceased, a geologist, suffered a heart attack while working on a mineral exploration site in the Northern Territory. The central dispute was whether the deceased's injury was sustained in the course of or arising out of employment, or alternatively, whether it constituted a "disease injury". The case was heard in the Workers Compensation Court of the Supreme Court of New South Wales.

The legal issues before the court included whether the deceased's employment was a substantial contributing factor to his heart attack, and if so, whether this injury fell within the scope of workers' compensation as defined by the Workers Compensation Act 1987. The court had to interpret sections 9a and 9b of the Act, considering the evidence of the working conditions, the temperature exceeding 42 degrees Celsius, and the medical evidence indicating that the heat was a substantial contributing factor to the heart attack. The court also considered relevant precedents, such as Fisher v Nonconformist Pty Ltd, Secretary, Department of Communities and Justice v Galea, Seltsam Pty Limited v McGuiness, and Kennedy Cleaning v Petkoska.

The court found that the deceased's employment was a substantial contributing factor to his heart attack injury. The working conditions, particularly the extreme heat, were deemed to have contributed substantially to the heart attack. The court concluded that the injury sustained was in the course of employment, satisfying section 9b of the Workers Compensation Act 1987. Consequently, the first respondent, Red Metal Limited, was found liable for the payment of the lump sum death benefit under section 25(1). The matter was listed for a further preliminary conference to address issues relating to dependency, apportionment, and interest.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.