Roberts v Woolworths Group Ltd - [2025] NSWPIC 365

CERTIFICATE OF DETERMINATION OF MEMBER
CITATION:	Roberts v Woolworths Group Ltd [2025] NSWPIC 365
APPLICANT:	Michael Craig Roberts
RESPONDENT:	Woolworths Group Limited
MEMBER:	John Turner
DATE OF DECISION:	30 July 2025
CATCHWORDS:	WORKERS COMPENSATION - Workers Compensation Act 1987; injury; section 4; Kooragang Cement Pty Ltd v Bates, Briginshaw v Briginshaw, Nguyen v Cosmopolitan Homes, and AV v AW applied; Held – award for the respondent in respect to the alleged injuries to the neck/cervical spine, both hips, both wrists, and both hands; applicant sustained injury as alleged to his thoracic spine; remitted to President for referral to Medical Assessor for impairment assessment.
DETERMINATIONS MADE:	The Commission determines: 1. There is an award for the respondent in respect to the alleged injuries to the neck/cervical spine, both hips, both wrists and both hands. 2. That the applicant sustained injury as alleged to his thoracic spine. 3. I remit this matter to the President for referral to a Medical Assessor pursuant to s 321 of the Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act1998 for assessment as follows: Date of injury: 15 August 2022 (deemed) – Disease. Body systems / parts: lumbar spine and thoracic spine. Method of Assessment: whole person impairment. 4. The documents to be reviewed by the Medical Assessor are: (a) Application to Resolve a Dispute and attached documents; (b) Reply and attached documents; (c) Application to Lodge Additional Documents lodged on behalf of the applicant dated 27 June 2025 and attached documents, and (d) copy of this Certificate of Determination. A brief statement is attached setting out the Commission’s reasons for the determination.

STATEMENT OF REASONS

BACKGROUND

Mr Michael Roberts (applicant) brings proceedings in the Personal Injury Commission (Commission) in which he pleads that on the deemed date of injury of 15 August 2022, as a result of employment by Woolworths Group Limited (respondent) he developed pain in his neck and back with radiation to the right lower limb and pain in both hips and both hands. That was as a result of carrying, twisting and lifting crates of milk/dairy products to move and stack them in the cool room. The injury on deemed date, 15 August 2022, resulted in aggravation and acceleration of disease process to the lumbar, thoracic, and cervical spine, wrists, hands, and hips.
The applicant seeks compensation pursuant to s 66 of the Workers Compensation Act 1987 (1987 Act) for permanent impairment of the cervical spine, thoracic spine, lumbar spine, right upper extremity, left upper extremity and right lower extremity.
It is not disputed that the applicant sustained injury to his lumbar spine. The respondent disputes alleged injury to the cervical spine, thoracic spine, both hips and both hands/wrists.

ISSUES FOR DETERMINATION

The parties agree that the following issues remain in dispute:
(a) injury to the cervical spine, thoracic spine, both hips and both hands/wrists – s 4 of the 1987 Act, and
(b) whether the applicant’s employment was a substantial contributing factor in respect to alleged injury to…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Roberts v Woolworths Group Ltd

Details

AGLC: Roberts v Woolworths Group Ltd [2025] NSWPIC 365
Case: [2025] NSWPIC 365
Decision Date: 30 July 2025

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of Roberts v Woolworths Group Ltd, the primary issue before the court was whether the applicant had sustained the injuries he alleged, specifically to his neck, cervical spine, both hips, both wrists, and both hands. This case was heard in the Workers Compensation Authority of New South Wales. The applicant, who worked for Woolworths Group Ltd, sought compensation under the Workers Compensation Act 1987 for injuries he claimed to have suffered during his employment.

The legal issues the court had to address were whether the applicant's injuries were indeed work-related and if they met the criteria for compensation as stipulated in the Act. The court examined the evidence presented, including medical reports, and applied the principles set out in relevant cases such as Kooragang Cement Pty Ltd v Bates, Briginshaw v Briginshaw, Nguyen v Cosmopolitan Homes, and AV v AW. These cases informed the court's approach to determining the credibility of the applicant's claims and the burden of proof required.

The court concluded that the applicant had sustained injuries to his thoracic spine as alleged. However, regarding the other injuries, the court found insufficient evidence to confirm the applicant's claims. Consequently, the award was made in favour of the respondent concerning the other injuries, but the applicant was found to have sustained an injury to his thoracic spine. The case was remitted to the President for referral to a Medical Assessor to assess the impairment related to the thoracic spine injury.

Orders