lnghams Enterprises Pty Ltd v Mella

DETERMINATION OF APPEAL AGAINST A DECISION OF THE COMMISSION CONSTITUTED BY A MEMBER
CITATION:	lnghams Enterprises Pty Ltd v Mella [2023] NSWPICPD 32
APPELLANT:	lnghams Enterprises Pty Ltd
RESPONDENT:	Susana Mella
INSURER:	Self-insured
FILE NUMBER:	A1-W6464/21
PRESIDENTIAL MEMBER:	President Judge Phillips
DATE OF APPEAL DECISION:	8 June 2023
ORDERS MADE ON APPEAL:	1.     The Certificate of Determination dated 30 May 2022 is confirmed.
CATCHWORDS:	WORKERS COMPENSATION – section 4(b)(ii) of the Workers Compensation Act 1987 – aggravation of a disease injury – alleged failure to provide adequate reasons – no error identified on appeal – Kowalski v Repatriation Commission [2011] FCAFC 43 and Beale v Government Insurance Office of NSW (1997) 48 NSWLR 430 applied – appeal dismissed
HEARING:	On the papers
REPRESENTATION:	Appellant:
Mr P Macken, solicitor
Leigh Virtue & Associates
Respondent:
Mr P Stockley, counsel
Fern Lawyers
DECISION UNDER APPEAL
MEMBER:	Mr P Young
DATE OF Member’s DECISION:	30 May 2022

INTRODUCTION

1. The respondent, Mrs Susana Mella, was employed by the appellant, Inghams Enterprises Pty Ltd, as a process worker for approximately 27 years between 1992 and 2019. During the course of this employment the respondent says that she contracted a disease, namely degenerative spondylolisthesis, which was due to the nature and conditions of her employment as a process worker. The respondent also alleges that there were two specific incidents involving aggravations of the disease, the first in 2014 when she fell off a chair, the second on 15 August 2018 when she slipped on a piece of chicken skin. The respondent ceased employment on or about 24 June 2019. As a consequence of the above circumstances, the respondent alleges that she suffered a consequential psychological injury. The appellant denied these claims. In a dispute notice issued pursuant to s 78 of the Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998 (the 1998 Act) dated 2 March 2020, the appellant disputed that employment was either a substantial contributing factor or the main contributing factor to the contraction or aggravation of a disease, and asserted that the effects of any aggravation had resolved.[1] In a subsequent dispute notice of 19 May 2020, the appellant maintained this declinature, and also disputed liability for a secondary psychological injury.[2] Both dispute notices relied on independent medical reports and argued that the respondent was no longer incapacitated for work, nor required any medical treatment.

   [1] Section 78 Notice, Application to Resolve a Dispute (ARD), p 34. This dispute notice relies on s 9A and the disease provisions of ss 15 and 16 of the Workers Compensation Act 1987 but does not refer to s 4(b) in respect of “main contributing factor”.

   [2] Section 78 Notice, ARD, p 40. This dispute notice relies on ss 4, 9A, 11A, 15 and 16 of the Workers Compensation Act 1987.

2. A review was sought by the respondent pursuant to s 287A of the 1998 Act. The appellant maintained its denial on 11 August 2020.[3]

   [3] ARD, p 53.

3. Proceedings commenced in the Commission, and the matter…