Tucker and Comcare (Compensation)

This matter concerned an appeal by Ms Tucker against a decision of a Review Officer concerning her entitlement to compensation under the *Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988* (Cth) (SRC Act). The dispute centred on the assessment of Ms Tucker's permanent impairment and her eligibility for compensation for household services and attendant care. The decision was made by Senior Member Egon Fice of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.

The Tribunal was required to determine two primary legal issues. Firstly, it needed to assess the correct percentage of permanent impairment (WPI) arising from Ms Tucker's accepted workplace psychological injury. Secondly, the Tribunal had to consider whether Ms Tucker reasonably required assistance with household services or attendant care services as a consequence of that injury, and whether the Review Officer's decision to deny compensation for these services was correct.

In reaching its decision, the Tribunal found that the correct WPI rating for Ms Tucker's work-related injury was 10%. Regarding non-economic loss, the Tribunal calculated Ms Tucker's entitlement at 28%, differing slightly from the 30% determined by the Review Officer. Consequently, the matter was remitted to Comcare for recalculation of Ms Tucker's compensation for non-economic loss. However, concerning the claim for household services and attendant care under section 29 of the SRC Act, the Tribunal affirmed the Review Officer's decision of 11 January 2017, finding that Ms Tucker did not reasonably require such assistance as a consequence of her accepted injury.