Scanes and Comcare (Compensation)

This matter concerned an appeal to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal concerning a claim for workers' compensation under the *Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988* (SRC Act). The appellant, Ms Scanes, sought death benefits and funeral expenses for her late husband, Mr Scanes, who died on 12 October 2020. The claim was based on the assertion that Mr Scanes' myocardial infarction in 1993, which was accepted as a compensable condition, was an effective or operative causal factor in his death 27 years later. Comcare had denied the claim, and the Tribunal was required to review this decision.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether Mr Scanes' 1993 myocardial infarction, a condition accepted as compensable under the SRC Act, was an effective or operative causal factor in his death in 2020, either alone or in combination with other identified causes. This required the Tribunal to consider the long-term prognosis following a myocardial infarction and the potential impact of pre-existing risk factors, such as hypertension, smoking, and stress, on the progression of coronary artery disease and subsequent mortality. The Tribunal also had to determine if the evidence satisfied the requirements for payment of death benefits to a spouse and for funeral expenses under sections 17 and 18 of the SRC Act, respectively.

The Tribunal considered expert medical evidence regarding the causal link between the 1993 myocardial infarction and Mr Scanes' death. Associate Professor Gutman opined that the 1993 infarction was an effective causal factor in Mr Scanes' death, noting that cardiogenic shock, a leading cause of death in acute myocardial infarction, is significantly predisposed to by previous infarction. Conversely, Associate Professor Colquhoun stated that while the 1993 infarction increased Mr Scanes' risk of death, he also noted that Mr Scanes had not sought medical opinion for his condition after April 1997 and that perceived stress, while a factor, had limited evidence regarding its effect on the prognosis of coronary heart disease. Ultimately, the Tribunal was not satisfied, on the balance of probabilities, that the 1993 incident resulted in Mr Scanes' death in 2020.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision under review. Ms Scanes' claim for death benefits and funeral expenses was dismissed.