Schodde and Comcare (Compensation) - [2015] AATA 598

Schodde and Comcare (Compensation) [2015] AATA 598 (17 August 2015)

Division GENERAL DIVISION

File Number

2014/1313

Re

Stuart Schodde

APPLICANT

And

Comcare

RESPONDENT

DECISION

Tribunal
Deputy President K Bean

Date 17 August 2015

Place Adelaide
The decision under review is affirmed.
.................. [Sgd] .................................
Deputy President K Bean
CATCHWORDS
COMPENSATION - Disc degenerative changes in lower lumbar spine - Applicant attributes to prolonged sitting at work - Employment did not make significant contribution to degenerative condition - No evidence of disc prolapse, protrusion or disturbance at work - Limited jurisdiction to consider aggravation of degenerative condition - Decision under review affirmed.
LEGISLATION
Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988, ss 5A, 5B, 14
CASES
Abrahams v Comcare (2006) 93 ALD 147
Health Insurance Commission v Van Reesch (1996) 45 ALD 302
REASONS FOR DECISION
Deputy President K Bean
17 August 2015

The applicant, Mr Schodde, is 34 years old and has worked for the Department of Human Services (Centrelink) since he was 19. Mr Schodde is currently employed as an APS 4 Customer Service Officer.[1]
[1] Exhibit 1, T6/40.
Unfortunately, in approximately 2010, Mr Schodde began to develop low back pain which worsened over the ensuing few years. In 2013, he also developed sciatica and a CT scan done of his lumbosacral spine in September 2013 revealed “intervertebral disc degeneration L3/4, L4/5 and L5/S1.”[2]
[2] Exhibit 1, T3/7.
On 10 September 2013, Mr Schodde completed a claim for workers’ compensation[3] in respect of the condition “prolapsed lumbar disc L4/L5, L2/3 and L5/S1”.[4] On his claim form he stated that the parts of his body injured were “lower back, right numb leg, severe right leg pain”. Mr Schodde nominated the time when he was injured as “1:00pm on 28 May 2013”.[5] As to the cause of his injury, he nominated “prolonged sitting (13 years of service)”.[6]
[3]     Exhibit 1, T6/31.
[4]     Exhibit 1, T6/32.
[5]     Exhibit 1, T6/32.
[6]     Exhibit 1, T6/34.
However, by a determination dated 28 November 2013, it was determined that the respondent was not liable to pay compensation to Mr Schodde for the injury and that decision was subsequently affirmed in a reviewable decision dated 14 January 2014.[7]
[7] Exhibit 1, T24/102.
On 17 March 2014, Mr Schodde lodged an application with this Tribunal seeking review of the reconsideration decision of the respondent, and giving rise to these proceedings.
LEGISLATION AND ISSUES
The statutory framework
The Act which is applicable to Mr Schodde’s claim is the Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988 (the SRC Act), and the most relevant provisions of that Act for present purposes are ss 14, 5A and 5B.
Section 14 relevantly provides that Comcare is liable to pay compensation in respect of an injury suffered by an employee if the injury results in death, incapacity for work, or impairment.[8] Section 5A defines the terms “injury” for the purposes of the SRC Act as including a “disease”:
(1) In this Act:
injury means:
(a) a disease suffered by an employee; or

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 Schodde and Comcare (Compensation)

Details

AGLC: Schodde and Comcare (Compensation) [2015] AATA 598
Case: [2015] AATA 598
Decision Date: 17 August 2015

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Schodde and Comcare were before the court in a matter concerning a claim for compensation. The applicant, Mr Schodde, sought compensation for disc degenerative changes in his lower lumbar spine which he attributed to his prolonged sitting at work. Comcare denied liability for Mr Schodde’s degenerative back condition, which was the subject of the review.

The central legal issues were whether Mr Schodde’s employment had made a significant contribution to his degenerative condition, and whether there was evidence of a disc prolapse, protrusion or disturbance at work. The court also needed to consider its limited jurisdiction to assess whether the condition had been aggravated by the employment.

The court found that there was no evidence that Mr Schodde's employment had made a significant contribution to his degenerative condition, and there was no evidence of a disc prolapse, protrusion or disturbance at work. The court held that its jurisdiction was limited to considering whether the employment had caused or materially contributed to the condition, and it did not have the power to consider whether the employment had aggravated the condition. Consequently, the court affirmed the decision under review, denying liability for Mr Schodde’s degenerative back condition.

Orders

Orders of the court

The decision under review is affirmed.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Accordingly, in light of those conclusions, I am obliged to affirm the decision under review, which denied liability for Mr Schodde’s degenerative back condition.DECISION The decision under review is affirmed.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.

Division	GENERAL DIVISION
File Number	2014/1313
Re	Stuart Schodde
APPLICANT
And	Comcare
RESPONDENT

Tribunal	Deputy President K Bean
Date	17 August 2015
Place	Adelaide