Kelso and Comcare (Compensation)

This matter concerned an appeal by Mr Kelso against a decision by the Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Commission (Comcare) regarding his claim for compensation. Mr Kelso, a Commonwealth employee, sought compensation for an injury described as anxiety and stress arising from alleged bullying and harassment in his workplace. The core of the dispute revolved around whether Mr Kelso's condition constituted an "injury" as defined by the relevant legislation, and specifically whether his employment contributed to his condition to a significant degree, or if his condition was a reaction to reasonable administrative action taken in a reasonable manner.

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal was required to determine two primary legal issues. Firstly, whether Mr Kelso's anxiety and stress qualified as an "injury" under the *Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988* (Cth). Secondly, the Tribunal had to consider whether, if it was an injury, it was contributed to by his employment to a significant degree, or if it was a consequence of reasonable administrative action taken in a reasonable manner.

The Senior Member found that the evidence did not establish that Mr Kelso's employment contributed to his condition to a significant degree. Furthermore, the Tribunal concluded that the actions taken by Mr Kelso's employer, which he alleged constituted bullying and harassment, were in fact reasonable administrative actions taken in a reasonable manner. Consequently, Mr Kelso's condition did not meet the criteria for an injury under the Act. The decision under review was affirmed.