Lim and Comcare (Compensation)

This matter concerned an appeal by Dr Lim against a decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (the Tribunal) concerning a claim for compensation. The central dispute revolved around whether Dr Lim's adjustment reaction with depressant anxiety was suffered as a result of reasonable administrative action taken in a reasonable manner in respect of her employment, specifically a performance appraisal conducted on 31 January 2011. Dr Lim contended that her condition arose on or before this date, while the Tribunal had determined it occurred later. A further issue involved the admissibility of a transcript of a consultation between Dr Lim and Dr Shaikh, which Dr Lim argued was obtained in accordance with exemptions under the Listening Devices Act 1992.

The Tribunal was required to determine several legal issues. Firstly, it needed to ascertain whether Dr Lim would have suffered her adjustment reaction with depressant anxiety if the performance appraisal on 31 January 2011 had not occurred. Secondly, the Tribunal had to consider whether to admit Dr Lim's transcript of her consultation with Dr Shaikh into evidence, assessing whether its creation or the preparation of the transcript breached the Listening Devices Act 1992. The Tribunal also considered the nature of a previous remittal by the Full Court and the potential connotations of the phrase 'according to law'.

In its reasoning, the Tribunal acknowledged that while it was not strictly bound by the rules of evidence, the circumstances surrounding the obtaining of the transcript were a relevant consideration in exercising its discretion, particularly in light of section 138 of the Evidence Act 1995. The Tribunal found that the circumstances in which the transcript was obtained most probably constituted a breach or breaches of the Listening Devices Act, although this finding was not entirely free from doubt. Consequently, the Tribunal determined it would be inappropriate to admit the transcript into evidence. Regarding the primary compensation claim, the Tribunal concluded that Dr Lim would not have suffered her adjustment disorder if the performance appraisal on 31 January 2011 had not occurred.

Based on these findings, the Tribunal concluded that Dr Lim's psychological condition was a result of reasonable administrative action taken in a reasonable manner in respect of her employment. Therefore, this condition was not considered an injury for the purposes of section 5A of the relevant Act, and the reviewable decision of 14 August 2013 was affirmed.