Skoko v Charles Sturt University

DETERMINATION OF APPEAL AGAINST A DECISION OF THE COMMISSION CONSTITUTED BY A MEMBER

CITATION:

Skoko v Charles Sturt University [2024] NSWPICPD 59

APPELLANT:

Hazbo Skoko

RESPONDENT:

Charles Sturt University

INSURER:

Employers Mutual NSW Limited

FILE NUMBER:

A1-W4873/23

PRESIDENTIAL MEMBER:

Acting Deputy President Geoffrey Parker SC

DATE OF APPEAL DECISION:

12 September 2024

ORDERS MADE ON APPEAL:

1.    The appeal is dismissed.

2.    The Amended Certificate of Determination dated 11 October 2023 is confirmed.

CATCHWORDS:

WORKERS COMPENSATION – Causation, no causal link between stress and aggravation of lower digestive tract condition – fresh evidence on appeal not permitted – academic material without expert assistance not permitted – EMI (Australia) Limited v Bes [1970] 2 NSWR 238; Fernandez v Tubemakers of Australia Limited [1975] 2 NSWLR 190 applied – section 352 of the Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act1998

HEARING:

On the papers

REPRESENTATION:

Appellant:

Self-represented

Respondent:

Mr B Stringer, solicitor

Moray & Agnew Lawyers

DECISION UNDER APPEAL:

Skoko v Charles Sturt University [2023] NSWPIC 589

MEMBER:

Mr J Isaksen

DATE OF MEMBER’S DECISION:

11 October 2023

INTRODUCTION

1. The appeal is from an Amended Certificate of Determination dated 11 October 2023.

2. The appellant, Mr Skoko, sustained injury to the right knee in the course of employment with the respondent, Charles Sturt University, on 28 August 2017. In this matter he claimed a 23% permanent impairment of the lower digestive tract as a condition consequential upon the original injury. The respondent disputed that claim.

3. The Commission made the following determination:

   “The Commission determines:

   1.     An award for the respondent for the claim made by the [appellant] that he has suffered a consequential condition affecting his lower digestive tract as a result of the injury to his right knee on 28 August 2017.

   The Commission orders:

   2.     The matter is remitted to the President for referral to a Medical Assessor as follows:

   Date of injury:                 28 August 2017

   Body Parts:right lower extremity (knee)

   left lower extremity (knee) as a consequential condition

   scarring (Temski)

   Method of Assessment:  whole person impairment

   3.     The following documents are to be forwarded to the Medical Assessor:

   (a)Application to Resolve a Dispute with attachments;

   (b)Reply with attachments, and

   (c)A copy of this Decision.”

4. The appellant challenges the award for the respondent.

5. The appellant was legally represented before the Member but represents himself on the appeal. The appellant has presented the substance of the appeal without technicality.

6. For the reasons that follow, the appeal is rejected. The determination of the Member is confirmed.

THE MEMBER’S STATEMENT OF REASONS

1. The Member, with the agreement of the parties, identified the issue in dispute as:

   “whether the [appellant] has suffered a consequential condition affecting his lower digestive system as a result of the injury sustained on 28 August 2017.”[1]

   [1] Skoko v Charles Sturt University [2023] NSWPIC 589 (reasons), [7].

2. The respondent accepted liability for the injury to the right knee.

3. On 4 June 2021, Member Beilby found a consequential injury to the left knee.

4. The appellant underwent total knee…