| CERTIFICATE OF DETERMINATION OF MEMBER | |
Citation: | Risteski v MKD Transcorp Pty Ltd [2023] NSWPIC 334 |
| APPLICANT: | Petar Risteski |
| RESPONDENT: | MKD Transcorp Pty Ltd |
| Member: | Cameron Burge |
| DATE OF DECISION: | 11 July 2023 |
| CATCHWORDS: | WORKERS COMPENSATION - Permanent impairment compensation; accepted right shoulder injury as result of frank incident; accepted left shoulder consequential condition; whether applicant suffered injury or consequential condition to his cervical spine; whether applicant suffered consequential condition to left hip; Held – the applicant has not discharged the onus of proof in establishing he suffered injury to his cervical spine; either in the frank incident which caused his right shoulder injury and left shoulder consequential condition; additionally the applicant has failed to discharge the onus of proof in establishing the nature and conditions of his employment have caused an injury to his cervical spine; the applicant suffered a consequential condition to his cervical spine as a result of the prolonged wearing of a sling on his right shoulder after surgery; the applicant suffered a consequential condition to his left hip as a result of the right shoulder injury; when he was placed on his left side in order for the right shoulder surgery to be carried out; all claimed body systems are to be subject of referral for medical assessment. |
| determinations made: | The Commission determines: 1. The applicant suffered an injury to his right shoulder in the course of his employment with the respondent on 7 October 2016. 2. As a result of the injury referred to in [1] above, the applicant suffered consequential conditions to his left shoulder, cervical spine and left hip. 3. The respondent is to pay the applicant's reasonably necessary medical and treatment expenses incurred as a result of his injury and consequential conditions. 4. The claim for permanent impairment compensation is remitted to the President for referral to a Medical Assessor to determine the permanent impairment arising from the following: Date of injury: 7 October 2016. Body systems referred: right upper extremity (shoulder), left upper extremity (shoulder), cervical spine, and left lower extremity (hip). Method of assessment: whole person impairment. 5. The documents to be referred to the Medical Assessor to assist with their determination are to include the following: (a) this Certificate of Determination and Statement of Reasons; (b) Application to Resolve Dispute; (c) Reply, and (d) applicant’s Application to Admit Late Documents dated 1 June 2023. |
STATEMENT OF REASONS
BACKGROUND
Petar Risteski (the applicant) suffered an accepted right shoulder injury in the course of his employment with the respondent MKD Transcorp Pty Ltd on 7 October 2016. There is no issue the applicant also suffered a consequential left shoulder condition as a result of that injury. Each of these body systems will be referred for medical assessment.
The applicant also alleges he suffered an injury to his cervical spine by way of aggravation as a result of the nature and conditions of his employment between 2012 and 8 August 2018 with a deemed date of injury of 14 August 2019, being…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read Risteski v MKD Transcorp Pty Ltd and more:
- Read every judgment in full
- Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
- See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
- Download judgments as PDF or Word
One click creates your free account or signs you in.
By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.
- Case
- [2023] NSWPIC 334
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court was required to decide whether Risteski's cervical spine injury occurred during the incident that caused his right shoulder injury and left shoulder consequential condition, or if it was a separate injury. Additionally, the court needed to determine whether Risteski's employment conditions contributed to his cervical spine injury, and if the left hip condition was a result of the right shoulder injury. The applicant's burden of proof was to establish the injuries and their connection to his employment.
The court concluded that Risteski did not meet the onus of proof for establishing a cervical spine injury during the incident that caused his right shoulder injury and left shoulder consequential condition. Furthermore, he failed to prove that his employment conditions caused his cervical spine injury. However, the court found that Risteski did suffer a consequential condition to his cervical spine due to prolonged use of a sling after his right shoulder surgery. The court also determined that the applicant suffered a consequential condition to his left hip as a result of being placed on his left side during the right shoulder surgery. All the claimed body systems were ordered to be subject to medical assessment.
The court ordered that all the claimed body systems be subject to medical assessment, indicating that further evaluation was necessary to fully determine the extent and nature of the injuries and conditions in question.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.