Poignand and Comcare (Compensation)

This matter concerned an appeal by Mr Poignand against a decision by Comcare regarding compensation for an alleged aggravation of major depression. The dispute centred on two incidents in 2014 and 2016, and whether these incidents constituted an injury or an aggravation of an injury, and if so, whether liability was excluded due to reasonable administrative action taken in a reasonable manner in respect of his employment. The case was heard by Deputy President Gary Humphries Ao.

The primary legal issues before the Tribunal were whether Mr Poignand suffered an injury or an aggravation of an injury as a result of the incidents in 2014 and 2016, and whether the exclusion for reasonable administrative action performed in a reasonable manner applied to either incident. The Tribunal also considered the scope of its jurisdiction to make decisions under s 19 of the Act, particularly where the reviewable decision and initial claim did not expressly or implicitly address the question of incapacity for work.

The Tribunal found that the 2014 incident, specifically the suspension of Mr Poignand's higher duties on 8 July 2014, constituted reasonable administrative action taken in respect of his employment and was therefore excluded from compensation under s 5A of the Act. This finding was based on the agreement of the parties and the medical evidence of Drs Oelrichs and Saboisky, which indicated that the incident was a reasonable response to a deteriorating situation within the workplace. However, the Tribunal determined that the incident on 18 May 2016 was not an outcome of reasonable administrative action taken in respect of Mr Poignand’s employment, and thus liability existed for an aggravation of his major depression on that date.

Consequently, the Tribunal varied the reviewable decision, finding Mr Poignand entitled to compensation under s 14 of the Act for the aggravation of his major depression, with a date of injury of 18 May 2016. Mr Poignand was found to be substantially, but not wholly, successful in his proceedings, and the Tribunal ordered Comcare to pay 75% of Mr Poignand’s costs.