Ross and Telstra Corporation Ltd

Administrative

Appeals

Tribunal

 

DECISION AND REASONS FOR DECISION [2006] AATA 731

ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL      )

)          No Q2005/364

GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE DIVISION		)
Re		LORRAINE ROSS

Applicant

And TELSTRA CORPORATION LTD

Respondent

DECISION

Tribunal Dr KS Levy, Member
Dr GJ Maynard, Member

Date24 August 2006

PlaceBrisbane

Decision The Tribunal affirms the decision under review.

..........[Sgd]...........

KS Levy

Presiding Member

Legislation

4.      The following statutory provisions are relevant to this claim:

“14 Compensation for injuries

(1)Subject to this Part, Comcare is liable to pay compensation in accordance with this Act in respect of an injury suffered by an employee if the injury results in death, incapacity for work, or impairment.

(2)Compensation is not payable in respect of an injury that is intentionally self-inflicted.

(3)Compensation is not payable in respect of an injury that is caused by the serious and wilful misconduct of the employee but is not intentionally self-inflicted, unless the injury results in death, or serious and permanent impairment.”

5.Section 4(1) of the SRC Act, in relation to the term “injury”, is as follows:

“Injury means:

(a)a disease suffered by an employee; or

(b)an injury (other than a disease) suffered by an employee, being a physical or mental injury arising out of, or in the course of, the employee’s employment; or

(c)an aggravation of a physical or mental injury (other than a disease) suffered by an employee (whether or not that injury arose out of, or in the course of, the employee’s employment), being an aggravation that arose out of, or in the course of, that employment;

but does not include any such disease, injury or aggravation suffered by an employee as a result of reasonable disciplinary action taken against the employee or failure by the employee to obtain a promotion, transfer or benefit in connection with his or her employment.”

Evidence

6.The following documents were admitted into evidence:

·Exhibit 1 The “T” documents prepared in accordance with section 37 of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975

·     Exhibit 2   Dr Reddan’s report of 3 May 2006

·     Exhibit 3   Documents related to the previous claim

·     Exhibit 4   Report by Dr Chris Martin dated 16 May 2005

·     Exhibit 5   Report of Dr John Harland dated 14 June 2005

·     Exhibit 6   Report of Dr Julie Thomason dated 28 September 2004

·     Exhibit 7   Report of Dr Kevin Feely dated 29 September 2004

7.      Oral evidence was received from the applicant, Mr Cooper (Telstra Manager), Dr Veltmeyer (the applicant’s General Practitioner), Dr Jill Redden (Psychiatrist), Dr Harland (Psychiatrist) and Dr Martin (Psychiatrist). 

8.      The evidence was that the applicant is now 61 years of age.  She is employed by Telstra as a communication’s technician.  On 16 July 2004, an acoustic shock (“a screech”) was experienced by the applicant.  She told the Tribunal she was not upset by the acoustic incident itself, but by the subsequent treatment of her by her employer.  She undertook her normal duties from 16 July 2004 to…