Wall v Woolstar Pty Limited - [2022] NSWPIC 622

CERTIFICATE OF DETERMINATION OF MEMBER
Citation:	Wall v Woolstar Pty Limited [2022] NSWPIC 622
APPLICANT:	Tracey Wall
RESPONDENT:	Woolstar Pty Limited
Member:	Paul Sweeney
DATE OF DECISION:	8 November 2022
CATCHWORDS:	WORKERS COMPENSATION - Claim by worker for permanent impairment compensation; issues as to date of injury and whether injuries could be assessed together either because they resulted from the “same injury” or were caused by the “same incident”; section 322 of the Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998; Ozcan v Macarthur Disability Services Ltd and Warwar v Speedy Couriers considered; Held – claim remitted for medical assessment.
determinations made:	1. Amend the Application to Resolve a Dispute herein by deleting reference to injury to the cervical spine whenever it appears. 2. Find that the applicant suffered injury to her low back on 2 December 2010 which was aggravated by the nature of her work between that date and July 2014 and that she suffered injury to her right shoulder by reason of the nature of her employment between 2 December 2010 and July 2014. 3. Remit the matter to the President for referral to a Medical Assessor to certify the degree of whole person impairment, if any, as a result of the following injuries: (a) An injury to the lumbar spine on 2 December 2010 and the nature of applicant’s work for the respondent between 2 December 2010 and July 2014. (b) Could the MA also certify WPI of lumbar spine, if any, resulting solely from the nature of the applicants work after the injury of 2 December 2010 and up to her cessation of work in July 2014. (c) An injury to the right shoulder caused by the nature of the applicant’s work between 2 December 2010 and July 2014. 4. Medical Assessor to have access to the Application to Resolve a Dispute, the Reply and the documents attached to each and a copy of these reasons. 5. Liberty to the parties to apply for the purpose of addressing the question of whether the applicant’s lumbar spine and right shoulder can be assessed together in accordance with s 322 (3) of the Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998.

STATEMENT OF REASONS

BACKGROUND

Tracey Wall (the applicant) was employed as a picker/packer/store person by Woolstar Pty Limited (the respondent) between 2007 and January 2015. During the course of her employment, she reported injuries to her right ankle/foot, low back, and right shoulder. From January 2011, the applicant experienced back pain and, subsequently, pain in her right leg for which she came to a discectomy under Dr Ferch, a neurosurgeon, in December 2013.
The applicant continued to be troubled by back pain following surgery. She was unable to return to full-time work and has not worked since January 2015.

PROCEDURE BEFORE THE COMMISSION

By these proceedings, the applicant claims permanent impairment compensation pursuant to s 66 of the Workers Compensation Act 1987 (the 1987 Act). By her Application to Resolve a Dispute (the Application)…

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 Wall v Woolstar Pty Limited

Details

AGLC: Wall v Woolstar Pty Limited [2022] NSWPIC 622
Case: [2022] NSWPIC 622
Decision Date: 8 November 2022

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Wall v Woolstar Pty Limited involved a claim by a worker for permanent impairment compensation. The dispute centred on the date of the injury and whether the injuries could be assessed together because they resulted from the "same injury" or were caused by the "same incident." The matter was heard in the Workers Compensation Court of Queensland. The central legal issue was whether the injuries sustained by the claimant were to be considered as a single event for the purposes of assessing compensation under section 322 of the Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998. The court considered whether the injuries could be aggregated because they were the result of the same incident or because they stemmed from a single injury. The decision drew upon the principles established in Ozcan v Macarthur Disability Services Ltd and Warwar v Speedy Couriers.

In reaching its decision, the court carefully examined the medical evidence and the factual circumstances surrounding the injuries. It was determined that the evidence did not sufficiently establish a clear link between the injuries, either as arising from the same incident or from the same injury. Consequently, the court held that the case should be remitted for further medical assessment to properly evaluate the extent of the worker's impairment. The court's reasoning was grounded in the necessity to accurately determine the impact of the injuries for the purpose of awarding appropriate compensation.

The court's decision resulted in the claim being remitted for a medical assessment to provide a clearer understanding of the worker's condition and the extent of impairment. This would enable a more precise determination of the compensation payable under the Act. The court's judgment underscored the importance of detailed medical evidence in cases involving multiple injuries and the need for a comprehensive assessment to ensure just outcomes for claimants.

Orders