Snapes Australia Pty Ltd v Tuliakiono

Snapes Australia Pty Ltd, the appellant, contested the decision of a Member of the Personal Injury Commission (the Commission) to remit the matter to the President for referral to a Medical Assessor to assess the whole person impairment in relation to the left upper extremity of Tuliakiono, the respondent. The dispute was about the contention as to whether the threshold whole person impairment of 11% was met, which was in contention. The dispute was heard in the Personal Injury Commission Appeal Tribunal (the Tribunal) and subsequently in the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of New South Wales.

The legal issues in the case were whether the Member had the power to remit the matter to the President for referral to a Medical Assessor to assess the whole person impairment, and whether the report of Dr Dave, who was not a SIRA trained assessor, was admissible as evidence. The appellant argued that the Member had no power to refer a matter to a Medical Assessor where the degree of impairment was under the 11% WPI threshold required in Section 66 of the Workers Compensation Act 1987. The appellant also submitted that Dr Dave was not qualified to assess whole person impairment as he was not a SIRA trained assessor.

The Tribunal found that the Member did have the power to remit the matter to the President for referral to a Medical Assessor to assess the whole person impairment. The Tribunal also found that Dr Dave’s report was admissible as evidence because the appellant had not objected to it at the hearing before the Member. The Tribunal further found that the assessment of whole person impairment was not limited to SIRA trained assessors, and that Dr Dave’s qualifications and experience were sufficient to enable him to provide an assessment of whole person impairment. The Court of Appeal upheld the decision of the Tribunal.

The Court of Appeal found that the Member had the power to remit the matter to the President for referral to a Medical Assessor to assess the whole person impairment, and that the assessment of whole person impairment was not limited to SIRA trained assessors. The Court of Appeal also found that the report of Dr Dave was admissible as evidence, and that the appellant had not established any error in the Member’s assessment of whole person impairment. The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal and ordered the appellant to pay the respondent’s costs of the appeal.