Mikajlo and Comcare (Compensation)

This matter concerned an appeal by Mr Mikajlo against a decision by Comcare regarding his entitlement to compensation under the *Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988* (Cth) for injuries sustained to his left and right shoulders. The core of the dispute revolved around whether Mr Mikajlo continued to suffer from the effects of his compensable injury as at 23 June 2010, and if so, whether that injury continued to result in incapacity, the need for household services, or treatment. The decision was made by Deputy President K Bean of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.

The legal issues before the Tribunal were twofold: first, whether Mr Mikajlo was still suffering from the effects of his compensable injury as of 23 June 2010; and second, if he was, whether that injury continued to cause him incapacity, necessitate the procurement of household services, or require ongoing treatment. These questions were central to determining his ongoing entitlement to compensation under sections 16, 19, and 29 of the *Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988*.

The Tribunal considered extensive medical evidence, noting a broad consensus among treating doctors that a lifting incident in June 2007 had affected both shoulders, with the left shoulder being more significantly injured. While some doctors noted pre-existing degenerative changes, the prevailing medical opinion, which the Tribunal preferred over that of Dr Haig, was that Mr Mikajlo developed symptomatic subacromial bursitis and impingement in his left shoulder immediately following the incident, which had not been present before. The Tribunal found overwhelming evidence of ongoing bursitis and impingement in the left shoulder since 2007. Regarding the right shoulder, the evidence suggested it was initially temporarily aggravated and recovered, but subsequently flared up due to overuse while compensating for the left shoulder's condition.

The Tribunal varied the decision under review, ordering that as at and from 23 June 2010, compensation liability pursuant to sections 16 and 29 of the *Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988* was ongoing with respect to Mr Mikajlo’s left shoulder only. No costs order was made at that stage, but Mr Mikajlo was advised that he could seek an order for reasonable disbursements incurred in the course of the application.