Pearson and Prosegur Australia Pty Ltd (Compensation)

This matter concerned an application by the Applicant, Mr Pearson, for review of a decision by Prosegur Australia Pty Ltd (the Respondent) affirming a determination that the Respondent was not presently liable to pay compensation for incapacity benefits. The Applicant claimed to have sustained a soft tissue injury to his neck and shoulder musculature on 30 January 2018, and had lodged a claim for compensation under the *Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988* (Cth) (SRC Act). The Respondent had initially accepted liability for a soft tissue injury to the left arm, but subsequently issued a determination and a reviewable decision stating no present liability for incapacity benefits.

The central legal issue before the Tribunal was whether it possessed jurisdiction to review the Respondent's decision. This question hinged on whether the Respondent's decision constituted a "reviewable decision" as defined by the SRC Act, specifically a decision made under section 62 of the Act. The Respondent argued, relying on previous Tribunal decisions, that jurisdiction to review decisions concerning medical expenses (section 16) or incapacity payments (section 19) was contingent on the existence of specific claims made under those sections to which the decision responded.

The Tribunal clarified that its jurisdiction to review decisions arises under section 64 of the SRC Act, which pertains to "reviewable decisions" defined in section 60(1) as decisions made under subsection 38(4) or section 62. The Tribunal's task in prior cases, such as *Re Lock and Comcare*, was to ascertain whether the decision under review was indeed made under section 62. This involved determining if the decision was a reconsideration of a determination on the insurer's own motion under section 62(1), or a decision under section 62(4)-(5) following the rejection of a claim and a request for reconsideration under section 62(2)-(3). In the present case, the Tribunal found that the Respondent's decision, which broadly stated no present liability, did not clearly identify itself as a decision made under section 62, nor was it evident that it was a reconsideration of a specific original determination or a response to a rejected claim and subsequent request for reconsideration.

The Tribunal found that it had jurisdiction to review the decision. The Applicant sought review of the reviewable decision of 16 August 2018, which affirmed the determination of 26 June 2018 that the Respondent was not presently liable to pay compensation for incapacity benefits. The Tribunal's reasoning indicated that the Respondent's decision was a "reviewable decision" under the SRC Act, thus falling within its jurisdiction.