Kazakos and Comcare (Compensation)

This matter concerned an appeal by Ms Kazakos against a decision by Comcare regarding compensation for a psychiatric condition. The dispute centred on whether Ms Kazakos's condition constituted an "injury" for the purposes of the relevant legislation and, if so, whether it arose out of or in the course of her employment. The case was heard by D. J. Morris SM.

The primary legal issues before the Tribunal were to determine whether Ms Kazakos suffered an "injury" as defined by the *Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988* (Cth), and specifically whether her psychiatric condition, which she contended was Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) arising from a street assault on 1 July 2014, was caused by or aggravated to a substantial degree by her employment. The Tribunal also considered the distinction between an "injury" and a "disease" under the Act and the temporal connection of the incident to her employment.

The Tribunal reasoned that while the street assault occurred during an ordinary recess from work, and thus fell within the ambit of employment for temporal purposes, the crucial question was causation. Expert psychiatric evidence indicated that Ms Kazakos suffered from a depressive condition, but the Tribunal found that the events of 1 July 2014 did not cause PTSD or a major depressive disorder. Instead, the evidence suggested she had an existing depressive condition of earlier onset, and the assault did not cause a new injury or aggravate an existing one to a substantial degree in the manner required by the legislation.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision of 9 February 2016, finding that the conditions for compensation under the Act were not met in relation to the contended cause and onset of the injury.