Ridgeway v Majkid Pty Ltd (Deregistered)

Ridgeway, a worker, brought proceedings against Majkid Pty Ltd, a deregistered company, in the Commonwealth Court of Australia. Ridgeway had suffered a lumbar spine injury on a background of developmental conditions. The dispute centred around whether Ridgeway’s injury constituted radiculopathy, which would impact his entitlement to certain benefits under workers compensation legislation. Ridgeway argued that the Approved Medical Specialist (AMS) made a demonstrable error by relying on imaging reports instead of reviewing the actual films to determine if radiculopathy was present.

The court had to decide whether the AMS was required to review the imaging films to determine if Ridgeway's injury met the criteria for radiculopathy and whether the failure to review constituted a demonstrable error. The court also considered the extent to which the Guidelines required the AMS to disclose whether he reviewed the films. Additionally, the court needed to assess whether the reliance on the reports of specialist radiologists was sufficient to meet the criteria for radiculopathy.

The court found that while it was not necessary for the AMS to review the films, the Guidelines did require the AMS to state whether he did or did not review them. The court held that the AMS’s reliance on the reports of specialist radiologists was sufficient. However, the criteria for radiculopathy were not met as the AMS had not identified the presence of radiculopathy. Consequently, the court confirmed the decision of the Member of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) to deny Ridgeway’s claim for radiculopathy.

No further orders were made by the court.