Rowe v Q-Comp

The case of Rowe v Q-Comp involved a dispute between Mr. Rowe, a former employee of the Pickerings dealership, and Q-Comp, the workers' compensation insurer. Mr. Rowe had previously applied for statutory compensation for a psychiatric injury sustained on 22 April 2008 and subsequently lodged a Notice of Claim for Damages for the same injury. The legal issues before the court were whether the injury claimed in the Notice of Claim for Damages was the same as the injury for which statutory compensation was previously sought, and if so, whether Mr. Rowe was precluded from seeking common law damages under section 237(1)(d) of the relevant legislation. Additionally, the court needed to determine whether Q-Comp's decision rejecting the Notice of Claim for Damages was a reviewable decision and if so, whether it could be reviewed by Q-Comp and an Industrial Magistrate.

The court found that the injury claimed in the Notice of Claim for Damages was indeed the same as the one for which statutory compensation was sought. Given that Mr. Rowe had already received statutory compensation for the psychiatric injury, he was precluded from seeking common law damages under section 237(1)(d). The court further held that Q-Comp's decision rejecting the Notice of Claim for Damages was a reviewable decision as defined in section 540 of the Workers Compensation and Rehabilitation Regulation 2003. However, the court determined that this decision was not reviewable by Q-Comp or an Industrial Magistrate under section 548 of the Workers Compensation and Rehabilitation Regulation 2003.

The appeal was dismissed, meaning the appeal was not successful.