Taylor v Absolute Aquarium Products Pty Ltd - [2025] NSWPICMP 192

DETERMINATION OF APPEAL PANEL
CITATION:	Taylor v Absolute Aquarium Products Pty Ltd [2025] NSWPICMP 192
APPELLANT:	Lisa Marie Taylor
RESPONDENT:	Absolute Aquarium Products Pty Ltd
APPEAL PANEL
MEMBER:	Marshal Douglas
MEDICAL ASSESSOR:	Michael Davies
MEDICAL ASSESSOR:	Sophia Lahz
DATE OF DECISION:	21 March 2025
CATCHWORDS:	WORKERS COMPENSATION - Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998; member found that the appellant’s epilepsy was the result of the appellant’s injury; Member’s finding was confirmed on appeal; Medical Assessor (MA) found the appellant’s epilepsy condition was not the result of the appellant’s injury and did not assess the appellant had any permanent impairment of her nervous system as a result of her injury; Held – whether it was open to the MA to find the appellant’s epilepsy did not result from her injury; Appeal Panel held it was not; whether assessment of impairment can be made by reference to Section 13.b and Table 13-3 of the American Medical Association Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment, 5th ed (AMA 5) when bullet point criteria of paragraph 5.9 of the SIRA NSW Workers Compensation Guidelines for the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment, 4th ed 1 March 2021 (the Guidelines) not met; Appeal Panel held it can because paragraph 5.9 modifies section 13.3a, 13.3c, 13.3d, 13.3e, and 13.3f of the AMA5 and not section 13.3b; Medical Assessment Certificate revoked.

BACKGROUND TO THE APPLICATION TO APPEAL

Lisa Marie Taylor, the appellant, has appealed against the medical assessment that Medical Assessor Ron Granot conducted of a medical dispute between the appellant and Absolute Aquarium Products Pty Ltd, the respondent.
The appellant relies on the ground for appeal listed at s 327(3)(d) of the Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998 (the 1998 Act), being the MAC contains a demonstrable error.
The delegate is satisfied that, on the face of the application, at least one ground of appeal has been made out. The Appeal Panel has conducted a review of the original medical assessment but limited to the ground(s) of appeal on which the appeal is made.
Rule 128 of the Personal Injury Commission Rules 2021 (the PIC Rules) and Procedural Direction PIC7 - Appeals, reviews, reconsiderations and correction of obvious errors in medical disputes set out the practice and procedure in relation to the medical appeal process under s 328 of the 1998 Act. An Appeal Panel determines its own procedures in accordance with r 128(1) of the PIC Rules.
The assessment of permanent impairment is conducted in accordance with the SIRA NSW Workers Compensation Guidelines for the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment, 4^th ed
1 March 2021 (the Guidelines) and the American Medical Association Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment, 5^th ed (AMA 5).

RELEVANT FACTUAL BACKGROUND

The appellant suffered an injury on 6 February 2013 while working for the respondent. Her injury occurred as consequence of a heavy fire door, that was unhinged and leaning against a wall, falling on her head whilst she was mopping the floors.
On…

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 Taylor v Absolute Aquarium Products 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: [2025] NSWPICMP 192
Decision Date: 21 March 2025

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Taylor v Absolute Aquarium Products Pty Ltd involved an appeal against a decision made by a Member of the Workers Compensation Commission of New South Wales. The appellant, Taylor, sought to establish a causal link between her workplace injury and her subsequent development of epilepsy, as well as to determine the extent of any permanent impairment resulting from her injury. The dispute was heard by the Appeal Panel of the Workers Compensation Commission of New South Wales. The central legal issues that the Appeal Panel had to address were whether the Medical Assessor was correct in finding that the appellant's epilepsy did not result from her workplace injury, and whether the assessment of impairment could be made by reference to the American Medical Association Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment when the criteria specified in the SIRA NSW Workers Compensation Guidelines were not met.

The Appeal Panel examined the findings of the Medical Assessor, who concluded that the appellant's epilepsy was not caused by her workplace injury and did not result in any permanent impairment of her nervous system. The appellant argued that the Medical Assessor's findings were incorrect and that her epilepsy was indeed a consequence of her injury. The Appeal Panel considered the relevant statutory provisions and guidelines, including the Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998, the SIRA NSW Workers Compensation Guidelines, and the American Medical Association Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment. The Appeal Panel held that it was open to the Medical Assessor to find that the appellant's epilepsy did not result from her workplace injury, and therefore upheld the original decision. Additionally, the Appeal Panel ruled that the assessment of impairment could be made by reference to the American Medical Association Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment even when the criteria specified in the SIRA NSW Workers Compensation Guidelines were not met, because the Guidelines only modified certain sections of the AMA Guides and not section 13.3b.

Consequently, the Appeal Panel revoked the Medical Assessment Certificate issued by the Medical Assessor. The decision confirms the importance of adhering to the specific guidelines and statutory provisions when assessing workplace injuries and the resulting impairments. The outcome underscores the need for a detailed and methodical approach to such assessments to ensure accurate and fair outcomes for all parties involved.

Orders