Paine and Comcare

Administrative

Appeals

Tribunal

 

DECISION AND REASONS FOR DECISION [2006] AATA 772

ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL      )

)          No Q2003/55, Q2004/640, Q2004/913

GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE DIVISION		)
Re		RAYLENE PAINE

Applicant

And COMCARE

Respondent

DECISION

Tribunal Senior Member B J McCabe

Date8 September 2006

PlaceBrisbane

Decision The decisions under review are affirmed.

................[Sgd]..............................

SENIOR MEMBER

2.      The evidence suggests the applicant does not suffer any ongoing physical problems with her knee. The balance of the evidence also suggests the applicant’s employment has not made a contribution to the development or aggravation of her psychiatric condition. It follows all three of the reviewable decisions should be affirmed. I explain my reasons in more detail below.

the material before the tribunal

3. The Tribunal was provided with the documents required under s 37 of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975. The following documents were also tendered in evidence and taken into consideration for the purposes of this decision:

·Report of Dr Pentis dated 12 September 2003 (exhibit 4);

·Report of Dr Pentis dated 25 January 2005 (exhibit 5);

·Report of Dr Mulholland dated 25 May 2005 (exhibit 6);

·Copy of the decision of the respondent dated 5 October 2004 (exhibit 7);

·Report of Dr Morris dated 10 December 2003 (exhibit 8);

·Report of Dr Reddan dated 15 May 2005 (exhibit 9);

·Written statement of Raylene Paine dated 18 August 2003 (exhibit 10);

·Summonsed medical records of Dr Ingamells (exhibit 12);

·Extract of summonsed documents received from Crestmead Medical Centre (exhibt 13, 15 & 16);

·Extract from the applicants employee records (exhibit 14);

·Supplementary report of Dr Mulholland dated 17 February 2006 (exhibit 17);

·Supplementary report of Dr Reddan dated 30 March 2006 (exhibit 18); and

·Statement of Nicole Butcher dated 9 February 2005 (exhibit 19).

4.       The applicant also tendered photographs of her leg (exhibit 11).

5.      The applicant gave evidence in person. The applicant’s daughter, Mrs Butcher and Drs Pentis, Stoker, and Mullholland also gave evidence. Drs Morris and Reddan were called by the respondent.

6.      Mr Dixon of counsel represented the applicant at the hearing. Mr Clark of counsel represented the respondent.

the factual background

7.      The applicant was born on 19 September 1954. She was 51 years of age at the time of the hearing.

8.      Mrs Paine started working as a clerical assistant at Centrelink’s central filing facility at Morningside in 2000. She had previously lived and worked in the Northern Territory. At Centrelink, her job entailed retrieving files from stacks in the warehouse when they were summoned from various Centrelink offices around Brisbane. When the files were returned to the warehouse, Mrs Paine and her fellow workers would file the documents in their allocated places on the stacks. On 18 December 2001, she was sitting on the floor placing files on the lowest level of one of the stacks. As she rose from the floor, she says she twisted her left knee. She says she immediately felt pain. She reported the incident to the first aid officer…