Short v White Collar Blue Pty Ltd - [2024] NSWPIC 282

CERTIFICATE OF DETERMINATION OF MEMBER
CITATION:	Short v White Collar Blue Pty Ltd [2024] NSWPIC 282
APPLICANT:	Gregory Short
RESPONDENT:	White Collar Blue Pty Ltd
MEMBER:	Cameron Burge
DATE OF DECISION:	28 May 2024
CATCHWORDS:	WORKERS COMPENSATION - Permanent impairment claim; left knee injury not disputed and will be the subject of referral to Medical Assessor; claimed lumbar spine injury and/or consequential condition disputed; whether applicant suffered lumbar injury, and if so, whether there is a causal connection between it and the left knee injury suffered several minutes earlier on the same day; whether the applicant suffered a consequential condition to his lumbar spine as a result of the left knee injury; Held – the applicant suffered a lumbar injury as alleged; the lumbar injury was causally connected to the left knee injury, noting the applicant’s uncontested evidence he undertook the heavy lifting task which caused the lumbar injury with increased loading on his back owing to the pain in his left knee; the applicant also suffered a consequential condition in his lumbar spine as a result of the left knee injury, caused by an altered gait and chronic limp; both left knee and lumbar spine referred for assessment, with a combined assessment to be provided.
DETERMINATIONS MADE:	The Commission determines: 1. The applicant suffered an injury to his left lower extremity (knee) and to his lumbar spine in the course of his employment with the respondent on 10 August 2017. 2. As a result of the injury to his left knee, the applicant also suffered a consequential condition to his lumbar spine. 3. The matter is remitted to the President for referral to a Medical Assessor to determine the permanent impairment arising from the following: Date of injury: 10 August 2017 Body systems referred: Left lower extremity (knee), lumbar spine Method of assessment: Whole Person Impairment 4. The documents to be referred to the Medical Assessor to assist with their determination are to include the following: (a) this Certificate of Determination and Statement of Reasons; (b) Application to Resolve a Dispute and attachments; (c) Reply and attachments save for the report of Dr Bentivoglio dated 8 March 2018 which is to be removed from the material referred; (d) respondent’s Application to Admit Late Documents and attachments dated 9 May 2024, and (e) applicant’s Application to Admit Late Documents and attached documents dated 17 May 2024.

STATEMENT OF REASONS

BACKGROUND

On 10 August 2017, Gregory Short (the applicant) was working as a labourer in the course of his employment with White Collar Blue Pty Ltd (the respondent) when he knelt to pick up debris only for a screw to enter into his knee cap. The applicant understandably felt immediate pain but somewhat startingly removed the screw from his own knee.
The applicant continued working, and approximately 10 minutes later, was asked to assist a colleague lifting a heavy piece of scaffolding. He alleges that because his left knee was in severe pain, he placed a lot of strain on his…

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.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Short v White Collar Blue Pty Ltd and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2024] NSWPIC 282
Decision Date: 28 May 2024

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of Short v White Collar Blue Pty Ltd, the applicant sought compensation for a permanent impairment arising from injuries sustained at work. The left knee injury was not disputed, and it was agreed that this would be referred to a Medical Assessor. However, the applicant also claimed that he suffered an injury to his lumbar spine and/or a consequential condition related to the left knee injury, which was disputed by the respondent. The dispute centred on whether the applicant had suffered a lumbar injury, if so, whether it was causally connected to the left knee injury, and whether there was a consequential condition in his lumbar spine due to the left knee injury. The case was heard in the relevant workers compensation tribunal.

The primary legal issues the tribunal was required to decide were the existence of a lumbar injury, the causal connection between this injury and the left knee injury, and the presence of a consequential condition in the lumbar spine resulting from the left knee injury. The applicant argued that the lumbar injury was caused by the increased loading on his back due to the pain in his left knee, and that this resulted in an altered gait and chronic limp leading to a consequential condition in his lumbar spine. The respondent disputed these claims, contending that the lumbar injury and any consequential condition were not related to the left knee injury.

The tribunal found that the applicant had indeed suffered a lumbar injury, which was causally connected to the left knee injury. This conclusion was based on the applicant’s uncontested evidence that he undertook the heavy lifting task causing the lumbar injury with increased loading on his back due to the pain in his left knee. The tribunal also determined that the applicant had suffered a consequential condition in his lumbar spine as a result of the left knee injury, caused by an altered gait and chronic limp. As a result of these findings, both the left knee and lumbar spine injuries were to be referred for assessment, with a combined assessment to be provided.

Orders