| CERTIFICATE OF DETERMINATION OF MEMBER | |
Citation: | Miller v Westpac Banking Corporation [2023] NSWPIC 356 |
| APPLICANT: | Deborah Lee Miller |
| RESPONDENT: | Westpac Banking Corporation |
| Member: | Michael Moore |
DATE OF DECISION: | 20 July 2023 |
| CATCHWORDS: | WORKERS COMPENSATION - Workers Compensation Act 1987; claim for lump sum compensation for a psychological injury; respondent admits that the applicant suffered a primary psychological injury arising out of or in the course of the applicant’s employment; the respondent’s defence to the claim was under section 11A on the basis that the injury was sustained wholly or predominantly as a consequence of reasonable action taken by the respondent with respect to performance appraisal or proposed transfer; the pleaded date of injury predated the proposed transfer so claim was limited to a defence based on reasonable actions taken or proposed to be taken with respect to performance appraisal; Held – the identified actions of the respondent did not constitute a process of performance appraisal and were more accurately viewed as management of one aspect of the applicant’s work performance; the actions were not a limited discrete process as held in Irwin v Director-General of School Education per Geraghty J; further held that in any event the identified actions by the respondent as constituting “performance appraisal” were not shown on the balance of probabilities to be the whole or predominant cause of the applicant’s injury; award for the applicant with referral to the matter for assessment of whole of person impairment by a Medical Assessor. |
| determinations made: | The Commission determines: 1. The applicant suffered a psychological injury arising out of or in the course of her employment. 2. I remit this matter to the President for referral to a Medical Assessor pursuant to s 321 of the Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998 for assessment as follows: (a) Date of Injury: 25 February 2020 (deemed). (b) Body systems/ parts: psychological /psychiatric. (c) Method of Assessment: whole person impairment. 3. The following additional documents to be reviewed by the Medical Assessor are: (a) Amended Application to Resolve a Dispute and attachments; (b) Reply and attachments; (c) Application to Admit Late Documents dated 6 April 2023, and (d) Application to Admit Late Documents dated 17 March 2023. |
STATEMENT OF REASONS
BACKGROUND
Deborah Lee Miller (the applicant) was born in 1971 and is presently 52 years of age.
The applicant commenced employment with St George Bank in approximately May 2001 working in the personal lending division based in Kogarah New South Wales.
It is not in issue that St George Bank was eventually acquired by Westpac Banking Corporation (the respondent) and it appears that the applicant continued working in the same role post the acquisition.
In the statement attached to the Application to Resolve a Dispute (the application) the applicant described her duties as follows;
“usual duties involved the following:
Incoming call centre lending banker, roll was to receiving calls up to 70 calls a day, regarding all banking, financial, Internet banking, Change in Interest rates, calculating and changing repayments…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read Miller v Westpac Banking Corporation and more:
- Read every judgment in full
- Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
- See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
- Download judgments as PDF or Word
One click creates your free account or signs you in.
By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.
- Case
- [2023] NSWPIC 356
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court considered whether the actions taken by Westpac were part of a performance appraisal process or merely part of managing Miller's work performance. The court held that the actions were not a discrete process of performance appraisal as outlined in the decision of Irwin v Director-General of School Education, but rather part of managing a specific aspect of Miller's job performance. Furthermore, the court found that even if these actions were considered part of a performance appraisal, they were not shown to be the whole or predominant cause of Miller's injury. The court concluded that Westpac's actions did not meet the threshold for exclusion under section 11A of the Workers Compensation Act 1987.
The court awarded Miller compensation for the psychological injury, and referred the matter to a Medical Assessor for an assessment of whole of person impairment. This decision underscores the importance of distinguishing between performance management and performance appraisal, and the need for clear evidence that any actions taken in the course of employment were the predominant cause of the psychological 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.