Usman v Woolworths Group Ltd - [2025] NSWPIC 292

CERTIFICATE OF DETERMINATION OF MEMBER
CITATION:	Usman v Woolworths Group Ltd [2025] NSWPIC 292
APPLICANT:	Usman
RESPONDENT:	Woolworths Group Ltd
MEMBER:	John Isaksen
DATE OF DECISION:	24 June 2025
CATCHWORDS:	WORKERS COMPENSATION - Workers Compensation Act 1987; claim for the cost of a right L4/5 foraminal discectomy for a consequential condition affecting the lumbar spine as a result of injury to both knees; respondent disputes the consequential condition to the lumbar spine and whether surgery is reasonably necessary as a result of the injury; consideration of Moon v Conmah P/L, and Kooragang Cement P/L v Bates; Held – worker suffers a consequential condition affecting his lumbar spine as a result of the injury to both knees; proposed surgery is reasonably necessary as a result of the work injury.
DETERMINATIONS MADE:	The Commission determines: 1. The applicant has suffered a consequential condition affecting his lumbar spine as a result of the injury to both left and right knees on 24 August 2020.

STATEMENT OF REASONS

BACKGROUND

Faisal Usman, the applicant in these proceedings, sustained an injury to both his knees on 24 August 2020 while employed as a despatch team member with the respondent, Woolworths Group Ltd.
Mr Usman was moving a loaded pallet jack when he slipped and felt severe pain in both knees. The respondent has admitted liability for the injury to both knees.
Mr Usman has undergone several operations on both his knees following the injury he sustained on 24 August 2020:
(a)    a right medial meniscal repair and a debridement of the left anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) and bone grafting below the left knee, performed by Dr Dao on
20 October 2020;
(b)    a left ACL reconstruction performed by Dr Dao on 22 March 2021;
(c)    bilateral knee arthroscopy and bone grafting performed by Dr Dao on
28 October 2021;
(d)    a right ACL reconstruction performed by Dr Randhawa on 7 April 2022;
(e)    a first stage left ACL reconstruction performed by Dr Randhawa on
16 March 2023, and
(f)    a second stage left ACL reconstruction performed by Dr Randhawa on
12 October 2023.
Mr Usman claims he has sustained a consequential condition affecting his lumbar spine as a result of the injury he sustained to both knees, and he seeks payment by the respondent of medical expenses incurred for the treatment of his lumbar spine. The respondent disputes this claim on the grounds that this condition is not as a result of the injury sustained by
Mr Usman on 24 August 2020.
Mr Usman seeks an order that the respondent pay the costs of a right L4/5 foraminal discectomy proposed by his treating specialist, Dr Singh, and reasonable medical expenses associated with that surgery. This is opposed by the respondent as being not reasonably necessary as a result of the injury sustained by Mr Usman on 24 August 2020.

ISSUES FOR DETERMINATION

The parties agree that the following issues remain in dispute:
(a) whether the applicant has suffered a consequential condition affecting 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.

Continue reading Usman v Woolworths Group Ltd

Details

AGLC: Usman v Woolworths Group Ltd [2025] NSWPIC 292
Case: [2025] NSWPIC 292
Decision Date: 24 June 2025

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of Usman v Woolworths Group Ltd, the applicant, Mr Usman, sought compensation for the cost of a right L4/5 foraminal discectomy, arguing that this surgery was necessary as a result of a consequential condition affecting his lumbar spine. This condition, in turn, was a result of an injury to both knees sustained during his employment with Woolworths Group Ltd. Woolworths Group Ltd contested the claim, arguing that the lumbar spine condition was not a result of the initial knee injuries and that the proposed surgery was not reasonably necessary. The case was heard in the Workers Compensation Commission of Victoria.

The primary legal issues the court had to address were whether Mr Usman's lumbar spine condition was a consequential condition of the initial knee injuries and whether the proposed surgery was reasonably necessary. The court needed to consider the definitions and criteria set out in the Workers Compensation Act 1987 and relevant case law, including Moon v Conmah P/L and Kooragang Cement P/L v Bates. These cases provided guidance on how to assess consequential conditions and the necessity of medical treatment in workers compensation claims.

The Workers Compensation Commission of Victoria found that Mr Usman did indeed suffer from a consequential condition affecting his lumbar spine as a result of the initial injury to both knees. The court held that the proposed surgery, a right L4/5 foraminal discectomy, was reasonably necessary to address the lumbar spine condition caused by the work injury. The Commission referred to the statutory definition of "consequential condition" and the requirement for medical treatment to be reasonably necessary, as outlined in the Workers Compensation Act 1987. The court concluded that the evidence supported the need for the surgery to alleviate the condition resulting from the work-related injury.

The final orders of the Workers Compensation Commission of Victoria were that Woolworths Group Ltd is liable for the cost of the right L4/5 foraminal discectomy, as the surgery was reasonably necessary to treat the consequential condition of the lumbar spine resulting from the work injury to both knees.

Orders