O'Gorman and Comcare (Compensation)

This matter concerned an application by Mrs O’Gorman for an extension of time to lodge an application for review of a decision made by Comcare. Comcare had determined that Mrs O’Gorman had no present entitlement to compensation for tenosynovitis of her right hand and wrist. This decision was reconsidered and affirmed by Comcare on 27 June 2017. The application for an extension of time was heard by Dr L Bygrave, Member, of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether it was reasonable in all the circumstances to grant Mrs O’Gorman an extension of time to lodge her application for review, pursuant to section 29(7) of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (Cth). This required the Tribunal to consider established principles, including whether Mrs O’Gorman had provided an acceptable explanation for the delay, whether she had "rested on her rights," any prejudice to Comcare, and the merits of the substantive application.

The Tribunal considered the explanation for the delay, which involved an administrative oversight by Mrs O’Gorman’s legal representative due to an email being sent to a junior secretary rather than a designated group email address, compounded by the representative's workload and the junior secretary's inexperience. The Tribunal noted that Mrs O’Gorman’s legal representative had actively sought clarification from Comcare’s delegate shortly after receiving the reconsideration determination. Taking into account the explanation for the delay and the merits of the substantive application, the Member was satisfied that it was reasonable in the circumstances to grant the extension.

The Tribunal ordered that the application for an extension of time be granted.