Macey v Platts Partnership

Case [2021] NSWPIC 77


CERTIFICATE OF DETERMINATION OF MEMBER 
CITATION: Macey v Platts Partnership [2021] NSWPIC 77
APPLICANT: Shawn Macey
RESPONDENT: Platts Partnership
MEMBER: Mr Brett Batchelor
DATE OF DECISION: 13 April 2021
CATCHWORDS:

WORKERS COMPENSATION- Claim for permanent impairment compensation pursuant to section 66 of the 1987 Act as a result of undisputed injury to the left upper extremity (shoulder), disputed injury to the cervical spine on the date of injury to the left shoulder, and disputed condition in the cervical spine consequent upon injury to the left shoulder and subsequent surgery thereon; examination of the evidence of post shoulder injury complaint in respect of the cervical spine in the clinical notes of the treating practitioners; finding in accordance with the principles of causation referred to in Kooragang Cement Pty Ltd v Bates and Murray v Shillingsworth that the applicant had suffered injury to the cervical spine on the date of the undisputed injury to the left shoulder, and also a condition in the cervical spine consequent upon injury to the left shoulder and the subsequent surgical treatment of that shoulder injury; matter referred to Medical Assessor for assessment of whole person impairment as a result of injury to the left upper extremity (shoulder) and to the cervical spine, and condition in the cervical spine consequent upon the left shoulder injury.

DETERMINATIONS MADE:

1.     The applicant sustained injury to the cervical spine on 29 March 2015.

2.     The applicant suffered a condition in his cervical spine consequent upon injury to the left upper extremity (shoulder) on 29 March 2015.

3.     The matter is remitted to the President for referral to a Medical Assessor for assessment of whole person impairment as a result of:

(a)    injury to the left upper extremity (shoulder) on 29 March 2015;

(b)    injury to the cervical spine on 29 March 2015, and

(c)    condition in the cervical spine consequent upon injury to the left upper extremity (shoulder) on 29 March 2015.

4.     The documents to be referred to the Medical Assessor are :

(a)    Application to Resolve a Dispute and attachments;

(b)    Reply and attachments, and

(c)    this Certificate of Determination and Statement of Reasons.

STATEMENT OF REASONS

BACKGROUND

  1. Shawn Macey (the applicant/Mr Macey) claims permanent impairment compensation pursuant to s 66 of the Workers Compensation Act 1987 (the 1987 Act) as a result of injury to his left upper extremity (shoulder) and cervical spine on or about 28 March 2015 arising out of or in the course of his employment with Platts Partnership (the respondent). Mr Macey was working on the respondent’s dairy farm at that time.

  2. On the date of injury Mr Macey was performing his work duties in the dairy. He was wearing gumboots, pushing cows from the yard onto a concrete area which lead into the dairy, when he slipped on a section of concrete which had become slippery from rain, dirt and cowpats. He lost his footing and as he fell to the ground, attempted to grab hold of a nearby gate in order…

Continue reading Macey v Platts Partnership

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
Macey v Platts Partnership [2021] NSWPIC 77
Case
[2021] NSWPIC 77
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Macey v Platts Partnership involved a claim for workers' compensation for permanent impairment. The applicant, Macey, sought compensation for injuries sustained to his left upper extremity, specifically his shoulder, as well as for injuries to his cervical spine. The dispute centred on whether the injury to the cervical spine occurred on the date of the undisputed shoulder injury and whether the condition in the cervical spine was a consequence of the shoulder injury and subsequent surgery. The matter was heard in the Workers Compensation Court of New South Wales.

The legal issues the court had to resolve were whether the applicant had indeed suffered an injury to the cervical spine on the date of the shoulder injury, and whether there was a condition in the cervical spine that was a consequence of the shoulder injury and the surgery that followed. The court had to examine the evidence presented in the clinical notes of the treating practitioners, particularly the post-shoulder injury complaints related to the cervical spine.

In determining the issues, the court applied the principles of causation as set out in cases such as Kooragang Cement Pty Ltd v Bates and Murray v Shillingsworth. The court found that the applicant had suffered an injury to the cervical spine on the date of the undisputed shoulder injury, and also a condition in the cervical spine that was a consequence of the shoulder injury and the subsequent surgical treatment of the shoulder. The matter was then referred to a Medical Assessor for the assessment of the whole person impairment resulting from the injuries to the left upper extremity and the cervical spine.

The final orders of the court were that the matter be referred to the Medical Assessor to determine the degree of whole person impairment attributable to the injuries to the left upper extremity and the cervical spine, including the condition in the cervical spine consequent upon the left shoulder injury.

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.