Reid and Comcare (Compensation)

Case [2025] ARTA 1628

Reid and Comcare (Compensation) [2025] ARTA 1628 (2 September 2025)

Applicant/s:  Jayne Reid

Respondent:  Comcare

Tribunal Number:                2024/1559

Tribunal:General Member M. Carey

Place:Melbourne

Date:2 September 2025

Decision:

1.The Tribunal sets aside the decision of 18 January 2024 under review.

2.In substitution for the decision set aside, the Tribunal decides that Ms Reid is entitled to compensation pursuant to section 14 of the Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988 (Cth) (SRC Act) in respect of the injury identified as ‘adjustment disorder’, subject of a claim for compensation dated 23 September 2023 with a date of injury of 14 September 2023 for the purposes of section 7(4) of the SRC Act.

................[SGD]................

General Member M. Carey

Catchwords

INJURY – ailment – whether employment contributed to ailment to a significant degree – whether ailment results in incapacity for work or impairment – whether medical treatment in relation to injury that was reasonable to obtain in the circumstances

LIABILITY – exclusionary proviso to definition of injury – whether administrative action taken in respect of employee’s employment – warning letter – action that is disciplinary in nature – whether administrative action contributed to the ailment to a significant degree – whether action taken reasonable and taken in a reasonable manner – reasonableness judged in the light of circumstances – disciplinary action by warning letter not reasonable in circumstances.

PROCEDURE – compliance with Tribunal notice to provide relevant documents – documents provided with redaction by respondent – redaction not authorised by Tribunal – application to Tribunal for orders regarding confidentiality to be sought by respondent – relevance of information to be considered by Tribunal on application.

PROCEDURE – unrepresented applicant –Tribunal proceedings partly adversarial and partly inquisitorial – leading of evidence – alleged perception of advocacy – perception without foundation.

Legislation

Administrative Review Tribunal Act 2024 (Cth)
Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988 (Cth)

Cases

Briggs v AWH Pty Ltd [2013] FWCFB 3316
Childs v Metropolitan Transport Trust (1981) FCA 200
Comcare v Martin [2016] HCA 43, (2016) 258 CLR 467
Federal Broom Co Pty Ltd v Semlitch (1964) 110 CLR 626
Kennedy Cleaning Services Pty Ltd v Petkoska (2000) 200 CLR 286
Lynch and Comcare [2010] AATA 38; (2010) 114 ALD 394
Maletic v Comcare [2016] AATA 210
R v Darling Island Stevedoring and Lighterage Company Limited; Ex parte Halliday and Sullivan [1938] HCA 44; 60 CLR 601
Weigand v Comcare (2002) 72 ALD 795
Westgate v Australian Telecommunications Commission (1987) 17 FCR 235

Statement of Reasons

  1. Ms Jayne Reid seeks review of a decision made on 18 January 2024 by Comcare to deny liability to pay compensation pursuant to section 14 of the Safety Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988 (SRC Act).[1] She made a claim for compensation on 25 September 2023 for an injury identified as ‘adjustment disorder with stress and anxiety.’[2] That claim was rejected by Comcare in a primary determination dated 24 November 2023[3] by the adoption of a report provided by  case manager employed by Allianz…

Continue reading Reid and Comcare (Compensation)

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
Reid and Comcare (Compensation) [2025] ARTA 1628
Case
[2025] ARTA 1628
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case between Reid and Comcare, heard in the Administrative Appeals Tribunal, centres around Ms Reid, a 57-year-old social worker employed by Services Australia, who sought compensation for an adjustment disorder with stress and anxiety, which she attributed to her employment conditions and a misconduct investigation. The primary issue before the Tribunal was whether Ms Reid’s ailment qualified as an injury under the Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988 (Cth), given the exclusionary proviso that certain reasonable administrative actions taken in respect of the employee’s employment are not compensable. Specifically, the Tribunal had to determine if the administrative action taken in respect of Ms Reid’s employment, specifically a warning letter, was reasonable and if it contributed significantly to her ailment.

The Tribunal concluded that the disciplinary action taken in the form of a warning letter was not reasonable under the circumstances. The investigation and handling of the misconduct allegation were deemed unreasonable as Ms Reid was not provided with adequate information about the specifics of the misconduct, which contributed significantly to her stress and anxiety. The Tribunal found that the administrative action, being unreasonable, did not fall under the exclusionary proviso and therefore, Ms Reid’s ailment was compensable. Furthermore, the Tribunal found that the administrative action did contribute significantly to Ms Reid’s ailment, and the condition resulted in incapacity for work and impairment. The Tribunal also addressed the procedural issue of the redaction of documents submitted by the respondent, ruling that the redactions were not authorised and that any application for orders regarding confidentiality should be sought by the respondent.

The Tribunal ordered that Comcare was liable for the compensation claim made by Ms Reid. The Tribunal also directed that the application for orders regarding confidentiality should be sought by Comcare.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

The SRC Act definition of ‘injury’ excludes from the field of compensation, any ‘a disease, injury or aggravation suffered as a result of reasonable administrative action taken in a reasonable manner in respect of the employee’s employment.’ [13][13] Subsection 5A(1) of the SRC Act.Background Ms Reid is a 57-year-old social worker. She had been a member of the Australian Public Service since 23 May 2011. At the time of her injury, she was a Professional Social Worker (APS Level SW6) working in Services Australia, located at Rosny Park in the State of Tasmania. Her work history with the APS was summarised in a rehabilitation referral report of 3 November 2023:[14]Ms Reid reported that commenced working within the Australian Public Service (APS) in 1995 within the Department of Social Security within the Youth Services unit. Ms Reid reported that she worked in a range of roles including within the Glenorchy, Eastern shore and Hobart offices and then completed 12-months working from the Northern Territory Centrelink office. Ms Reid reported that she later transferred to the Commonwealth Rehabilitation Service (CRS) where she worked for 7 years and had her 3 children during this time. Ms Reid reported she accessed a period of leave without pay and then returned to work in 2010 from the Rosny Centrelink office. Ms Reid reported that she has predominately worked within Service Centre environments with high-risk clients, including frequent family violence presentations and has worked from the Rosny office since 2010.[14] T20, 140. Ms Reid submitted her claim for compensation on 25 September 2023. In that claim the following was stated: [15](c)The injury for which she sought compensation was ‘adjustment disorder with stress and anxiety’.(d)At the time of injury, she was engaged in ‘General duties – social work interventions.’(e)In answer to the question as to when she first noted symptoms, she wrote, ‘01/06/2023 9.00am.’(f)Her account as to ‘what happened and how you were injured?’:There have been a number of incidents in the workplace with various colleagues which over time has had a major impact on me. In addition to this my social work duties are highly stressful including work with high risk clients. Further to this I have had a misconduct claim placed on me which I don't even fully understand how it occurred. The manner in which misconduct team dealt with this was appalling in my opinion.(g)She thought at the time of making the claim what she would be returning to work in ‘Less than 4 weeks’.[15] T8, 25. A medical certificate was issued on 21 September 2023 by Dr Amy Noakes of the Ochre Health Medical Centre in Hobart diagnosing ‘Adjustment disorder with stress and anxiety’ on a presentation of ‘Stress and anxiety increasing at work, increasing migraine headaches, feeling emotional and unable to cope.’ The stated cause of this condition closely parallels the descriptor given by the applicant in her compensation claim:[16]A number of incidents with various colleagues at work over the years which have gradually built up and contributed to stress and anxiety. One involving a conflict with a colleague who is loud in the office, and Jayne needed to confront him about this resulting in him not talking to her and contributing to an uncomfortable environment. ln addition works as a social worker with high risk clients, which is stressful. Also flagged for misconduct at work for inappropriately accessing own Medicare records, which Jayne is confident she did not do, and the misconduct team would not provide any further information to her about the details of this.[16] T6, 19.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

On 27 September 2023, Ms Reid made a statement to Comcare’s claims manager at Allianz Australia Insurance Limited.[17] In that statement, she expressed her belief that her condition was ‘the result of an accumulative effect from several incidents over time. I believe the combination of these incidents and the highly stressful work I do on a daily basis as a social worker have led to a very negative impact on both my physical and mental health.’ In particular, she mentioned events as early as 2021 and also the ‘fairly recent misconduct claim.’[17] T9, 32.Evidence The Tribunal heard evidence from four witnesses, Ms Reid, the applicant, and Ms Fenella Bender, her supervisor, Mr Clinton Willis of the Internal Investigations, Intelligence and Investigations Branch, Fraud Control and Investigations Division of Services Australia and finally, Associate Professor Khalid, a consultant psychiatrist. Ms Reid has made several statements including that dated 27 July 2023,[18] her incident report of 25 May 2023,[19] her request for reconsideration of the rejection of her claim,[20] and a more recent statement of 10 March 2025 (Exhibit A1).[18] T9, 32-33.[19] T17.1, 113.[20] T27.1, 188-190. Professor Khalid made two reports, dated 4 November 2024 (Exhibit R1) and a supplementary report of 23 May 2025 (Exhibit R2). Ms Fenella Bendall, the applicant’s immediate manager, provided a statement on 9 October 2023 (Exhibit R3),[21] and a further statement dated 1 May 2025 (Exhibit R4).[21] T13, 61-63. The chronology and emails to and from Ms Reid and Ms O’Driscoll and others associated with the Fraud Investigation section from 2 June to 4 July 2023 were collected together and received as Exhibit R5. The letter of 2 June 2023 that was attached to the initial email of Ms O’Driscoll of the Fraud Investigation Unit headed ‘Opportunity to respond to allegation’ was received as Exhibit R6. A bundle of clinical notes of the Ochre Medical Centre dated 11 January, 14 January, 16 February,21 March, 31 May, 18 July and 8 September 2022, 9 January, 10 January, 9 February, 12 April, 20 July, 14 September, 21 September and 4 October 2023 along with the clinical note of 19 September 2023 from Telus Health (formerly Benestar) were collectively tendered and marked Exhibit R7.Disease, as a mental ailment Comcare’s primary determination of 24 November 2023 accepted the existence of the diagnosed ‘adjustment disorder with anxiety and depressed mood’ that had been diagnosed by Dr Inglis Synnott, the consultant psychiatrist who had been engaged by Comcare to report on the claimed condition. The reason for the initial rejection of the claim was twofold: either interactions with colleagues and work were not significant contributors to the ailment or the misconduct investigation and warning were sufficiently significant as contributors to the ailment but were exclusionary factors, being reasonable administrative actions taken in respect of Ms Reid’s employment. The reviewable decision of 18 January 2024 followed a similar reasoning.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.