Rose and Comcare

This matter concerned an appeal before Mr S. Webb, Member, of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. The dispute involved Ms Rose and Comcare, with the core issue revolving around the nature and effect of decisions made by the Tribunal in relation to Ms Rose's claim for compensation under the *Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988* (SRC Act).

The legal issues before the Tribunal were whether a "determination" under the SRC Act included decisions made under sections 62 or 64, and how the Tribunal's decision on review, particularly consent decisions made in substitution of earlier reviewable decisions, should be treated for the purposes of the SRC Act. Specifically, the Tribunal had to consider the interplay between section 60 of the SRC Act and section 43(6) of the *Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975* (AAT Act), especially in circumstances where a primary determination was revoked on reconsideration and subsequently substituted by a Tribunal decision.

The Member noted that while section 60(1) of the SRC Act defines "determination" in a way that might exclude decisions under sections 62 or 64, it also adopts the meaning of "decision" from the AAT Act. This meant the Tribunal's decision on review was to be considered a "decision" for the SRC Act. Section 43(6) of the AAT Act states that a decision varied or substituted by the Tribunal is, for all purposes other than further review or appeal, deemed to be the decision of the original decision-maker and takes effect from the original decision's commencement date. The Member observed that in Ms Rose's case, the Tribunal's consent decisions on 23 January 2014 replaced reviewable decisions made on 21 March 2013 and 12 September 2013. The first reviewable decision affirmed a denial of liability, while the second revoked the primary determination and found a psychological ailment contributed to by employment, but excluded by other provisions. The Member highlighted a point for further consideration: whether the Tribunal's consent decision, which expressly set aside a revocation decision and made a fresh decision, replaced the original determination or merely the revocation decision. This question, concerning the scope of section 60 of the SRC Act and the power of Comcare to reconsider under section 62, was reserved for further argument.