Walia v The Workers Compensation Regulator

[2021] QDC 235

DISTRICT COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

Walia v The Workers Compensation Regulator [2021] QDC 235

PARTIES:

KHUSHPREET WALIA

(appellant)

v

THE WORKERS COMPENSATION REGULATOR   

(respondent)

FILE NO:

460/21

DIVISION:

Appellate

PROCEEDING:

Appeal against sentence

ORIGINATING COURT:

Magistrates Court
Brisbane

DELIVERED ON:

24 September 2021

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

22 September 2021

JUDGE:

Cash QC DCJ

ORDERS:

1.     The appeal is dismissed.

2.     The appellant pay the respondent’s costs of the appeal not exceeding the scale amounts in Schedule 2 of the Justices Regulation 2014 (Qld) to be paid to the registrar to be paid over to the respondent within six months.

APPEARANCES:

J Sibley of Sibley Lawyers for the appellant

G Morgan instructed by The Workers’ Compensation Regulator for the respondent

Introduction

1. The appellant committed an offence contrary to section 533 of the Workers Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 2003 (Qld) (WRCA). This section provides ‘a person must not in any way defraud or attempt to defraud an insurer’. The maximum penalty is a fine of up to 500 penalty units or imprisonment for up to five years. On 29 January 2021 the appellant appeared before a Magistrate at Brisbane. After hearing submissions, the Magistrate sentenced the appellant to imprisonment for 12 months but suspended the sentence immediately for an operational period of two years. Necessarily, a conviction was recorded. The Magistrate also ordered the appellant to pay compensation in the amount of $5,500.

1. The offence committed by the appellant arose in the following way. He was a casual van driver employed by a company that was an insurer pursuant to the workers’ compensation scheme. On 20 June 2018 he was driving when a car collided with his van. The van was knocked onto its side and the appellant suffered injury to his arm as a result of broken glass. The event was plainly traumatic. The appellant made a claim relating to both his physical and psychological injuries. There is no dispute that the appellant suffered psychological injury – by August 2018 he had been diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder. But, from 6 September 2018 until the end of that year, the appellant falsified or exaggerated the extent of his injuries to continue to receive workers’ compensation. He did this by telling some of those treating him that his physical injuries had not improved, and that he continued to experience debilitating pain. He also claimed to be too anxious to drive at all.

1. The appellant’s assertions were maintained until late 2018. They were shown to be false by surveillance arranged by the insurer. This showed the appellant driving a car without apparent difficulty on three occasions in September 2018. On one occasion the appellant was seen visiting a gym and using exercise machines. In late October one of his physiotherapists observed the appellant driving for about fifteen minutes. Then in late November a psychiatrist formed the opinion that the appellant was malingering.

1. By his plea the appellant admitted that he had defrauded the insurer. The amount the appellant dishonestly claimed as…