| DETERMINATION OF APPEAL PANEL | |
| CITATION: | MJS Quality Constructions Pty Ltd v Yacoub [2023] NSWPICMP 27 |
| APPELLANT: | MJS Quality Constructions Pty Ltd |
| RESPONDENT: | Fadi Yacoub |
| Appeal Panel | |
| MEMBER: | Brett Batchelor |
| MEDICAL ASSESSOR: | David Crocker |
| MEDICAL ASSESSOR: | James Bodel |
| DATE OF DECISION: | 31 January 2023 |
CATCHWORDS: | wORKERS cOMPENSATION - Appeal against assessment of a Medical Assessor (MA) of 15% whole person impairment (WPI) as a result of injury to the right lower extremity; the MA found two separate injuries to the right lower extremity, an injury to the muscle of the right thigh and a separate peripheral nerve injury to the saphenous nerve; the appellant submitted that Table 17-2 of the American Medical Association Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment, 5th ed (AMA 5) prevented an assessment of the peripheral nerve injury and loss of muscle strength in the right lower extremity; the respondent submitted that the two separate injuries permitted them both to be assessed in reaching a total assessment of WPI for the right lower extremity examination of relevant Tables in Chapter 7 of AMA 5 and also Chapter 3 of the NSW Workers Compensation Guidelines for the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment, 4th ed, reissued 1 March 2021; Held – the MA was correct in his diagnosis of two separate injuries to the right lower extremity, and that Table 17-2 of AMA 5 did not prevent the two separate injuries to the right lower extremity being assessed, and combined to give the total assessment in respect of injury to the right lower extremity as found by the MA; Medical Assessment Certificate of the MA confirmed. |
BACKGROUND TO THE APPLICATION TO APPEAL
On 4 October 2022 MJS Quality Constructions Pty Ltd (the appellant) lodged an Application to Appeal Against the Decision of a Medical Assessor. The medical dispute was assessed by Dr Mark Burns (the MA), a Medical Assessor, who issued a Medical Assessment Certificate (MAC) on 7 September 2022.
The appellant relies on the following grounds of appeal under s 327(3) of the Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998 (1998 Act):
· the assessment was made on the basis of incorrect criteria (the incorrect criteria ground), and
· the MAC contains a demonstrable error (the demonstrable error ground).
The delegate is satisfied that, on the face of the application, at least one ground of appeal has been made out. The Appeal Panel (the Panel) has conducted a review of the original medical assessment but limited to the ground(s) of appeal on which the appeal is made.
The Personal Injury Commission Rules 2021 (the PIC Rules), and Procedural Direction PIC7 – Appeals, reviews, reconsiderations and correction of obvious errors in medical disputes set out the practice and procedure in relation to the medical appeal process under s 328 of the 1998 Act. An Appeal Panel determines its own procedures in accordance with the PIC Rules.
The assessment of permanent impairment is conducted in accordance with the NSW Workers Compensation Guidelines for the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment
Continue reading MJS Quality Constructions Pty Ltd v Yacoub
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- MJS Quality Constructions Pty Ltd v Yacoub [2023] NSWPICMP 27
- Case
- [2023] NSWPICMP 27
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court considered whether the two injuries could be assessed separately or whether Table 17-2 of AMA 5 precluded such an assessment. The court found that the Medical Assessor correctly diagnosed two separate injuries to the right lower extremity. The court further held that Table 17-2 of AMA 5 did not prevent the two separate injuries from being assessed, and the combined assessment resulted in the total WPI found by the Medical Assessor. The court examined the relevant tables in AMA 5 and the NSW Workers Compensation Guidelines and found that the Medical Assessor's assessment was consistent with the applicable guidelines.
Accordingly, the court upheld the assessment of the Medical Assessor, and the Medical Assessment Certificate was confirmed. The court's decision affirmed the Medical Assessor's findings and provided clarity on the assessment of separate injuries under the relevant guidelines.
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.