Whitbread v Allambi Care Ltd - [2025] NSWPICMP 515

DETERMINATION OF APPEAL PANEL
CITATION:	Whitbread v Allambi Care Ltd [2025] NSWPICMP 515
APPELLANT:	Joseph Michael Whitbread
RESPONDENT:	Allambi Care Limited
APPEAL PANEL
MEMBER:	John Isaksen
MEDICAL ASSESSOR:	Douglas Andrews
MEDICAL ASSESSOR:	John Lam-Po-Tang
DATE OF DECISION:	16 June 2025
CATCHWORDS:	WORKERS COMPENSATION - Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998; review of Medical Assessment Certificate (MAC); appeal from assessment of whole person impairment (WPI) for psychological injury; worker challenges assessment of the psychiatric impairment rating scale (PIRS) for social functioning; consideration of Ferguson v State of New South Wales; Held – no demonstrable error or application of incorrect criteria found in assessment of social functioning; MAC confirmed.

BACKGROUND TO THE APPLICATION TO APPEAL

On 6 May 2025 Joseph Michael Whitbread (the appellant) lodged an Application to Appeal Against the Decision of a Medical Assessor. The medical dispute was assessed by Dr Canaris, a Medical Assessor, who issued a Medical Assessment Certificate (MAC) on 1 May 2025.
The appellant relies on the following grounds of appeal under s 327(3) of the Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998 (the 1998 Act):
· the assessment was made on the basis of incorrect criteria, and
· 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 sustained a psychological injury in the course of his employment as a youth worker and then a residential officer with the respondent, Allambi Care Limited. The appellant was subjected to many assaults and much abuse from difficult clients whom he was required to care for over five and a half years of employment with the respondent
The deemed date of injury is 2 June 2021, which is when the appellant ceased work due to the development of anxiety and panic when he learned that a very difficult client who had previously assaulted him was returning to where the appellant worked.
The appellant made a claim made a claim for a lump sum payment for 26% whole person impairment (WPI) based upon an assessment made by Dr Allan, consultant psychiatrist, in a report dated 17…

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 Whitbread v Allambi Care Ltd

Details

AGLC: Whitbread v Allambi Care Ltd [2025] NSWPICMP 515
Case: [2025] NSWPICMP 515
Decision Date: 16 June 2025

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Whitbread v Allambi Care Ltd is a case where the plaintiff, a worker, appealed against an assessment of whole person impairment for a psychological injury. The dispute was heard in the Court of Appeal. The primary issue before the court was whether the assessment of the psychiatric impairment rating scale for social functioning contained any demonstrable error or an application of incorrect criteria.

The court considered the relevant legislative framework, specifically the Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998. The worker argued that the assessment of the psychiatric impairment rating scale for social functioning was flawed. The court examined the case of Ferguson v State of New South Wales to ascertain the proper approach to such assessments. After thorough consideration, the court found that there was no demonstrable error or misapplication of criteria in the assessment of social functioning. The court confirmed the Medical Assessment Certificate as it stood.

In reaching its decision, the court highlighted the importance of accurately assessing social functioning in psychological injury cases, ensuring that the assessment process was transparent and based on appropriate criteria. Given the findings, the court dismissed the appeal and upheld the original assessment. The final order was that the Medical Assessment Certificate remained in effect, with no changes to the assessment of whole person impairment for the psychological injury.

Orders