Moran and Inco Ships Pty Ltd (Compensation)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (the Tribunal) considered a dispute between Mr Moran (the Applicant) and Inco Ships Pty Ltd (the Respondent) concerning a claim for compensation for an alleged psychiatric or psychological injury. The Respondent had affirmed its earlier decision to decline liability for the alleged injuries.

The Tribunal was required to determine two primary legal issues: first, whether the Applicant had a pre-existing psychological condition; and second, whether the Applicant sustained a psychological or psychiatric injury arising out of, or in the course of, his employment with the Respondent, and if so, whether the employment contributed to the condition to a material degree.

The Tribunal's reasoning focused on the evidence presented regarding the Applicant's mental health history and the circumstances surrounding his inability to obtain an Australian Maritime Safety Authority (AMSA) medical certificate. Evidence from Mr Carmody, a mental health professional, indicated that the Applicant had been experiencing severe stress, anxiety, mild depression, and issues related to alcohol use, impulse control, and adjustment disorders, dating back to at least July 2017. These reports detailed ongoing difficulties stemming from marital separation and relationship issues, which predated the period in question. While the Applicant reported feeling frustrated and depressed when Dr Huynh could not immediately issue the AMSA certificate, the Tribunal noted that the delay in certification was due to non-work related medical issues and the need for further information regarding his pre-existing health conditions. The Tribunal also considered a medical certificate from Dr Lim, dated 20 January 2020, which stated the Applicant was unfit for work due to an adjustment disorder resulting from the Respondent refusing him work, but this was in the context of the ongoing AMSA certification issues.

The Tribunal affirmed the Respondent's decision to decline liability. The decision was based on the finding that the Applicant had pre-existing psychological conditions and that the alleged injury did not arise out of or in the course of his employment in a manner that would attract compensation under the relevant legislation.