Ocampo and Australian Postal Corporation (Compensation)

This matter concerned four separate claims brought by the applicant, Ms Ocampo, against the Australian Postal Corporation concerning injuries allegedly sustained during her employment as a parcel post officer. The claims related to the aggravation of pre-existing cervical spondylosis, aggravation of neck and shoulder injuries, and a secondary psychological condition. The court was required to determine whether these conditions constituted an injury or an aggravation of a disease under the *Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988* (Cth) (SRC Act) and whether they continued to result in incapacity for work or a need for medical treatment.

The legal issues before the court were whether the applicant’s aggravation of cervical spondylosis, accepted as having occurred on 6 April 2017, continued to cause incapacity after 2 July 2017. Further, the court had to determine if the applicant was entitled to compensation for an aggravation of neck and shoulder injuries sustained on 21 February 2018, and for a separate claim of aggravation of neck and shoulder injury combined with the nature and conditions of her employment, with a deemed injury date of 7 April 2017. Finally, the court considered whether the applicant was entitled to compensation for a psychological condition that was secondary to her alleged neck and left shoulder symptoms.

The court considered the definitions of "injury" and "disease" under the SRC Act, which require a significant degree of contribution from employment for a disease, and that an injury (other than a disease) must arise out of, or in the course of, employment. The court noted the applicant's evidence regarding the physical demands of her role, including lifting heavy parcels, and the onset of pain symptoms. It also considered medical evidence regarding the applicant's conditions, including the opinion that her psychological condition arose from the disability consequent to the injury, combined with pain, rather than solely from pain. The court ultimately preferred the evidence of Dr Ventura regarding the diagnosis of Somatic Symptom Disorder, noting that the date this condition reached the threshold for a psychiatric disorder was May 2018, which was supported by other medical evidence.

In relation to all four applications, the court affirmed the reviewable decisions made by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. This meant that the applicant's claims for compensation in respect of the aggravation of her cervical spondylosis, neck and shoulder injuries, and the secondary psychological condition were unsuccessful.