Wild and Comcare (Compensation)

This matter concerned an application by Ms Samanthia Wild for compensation under the *Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988* (SRC Act) for bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome and bilateral subacromial bursitis. Ms Wild alleged that her employment with the Department of Human Services had contributed to a significant degree to these conditions. Comcare had initially denied her claim, and an Independent Review Officer affirmed that decision. Ms Wild then applied to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal for a review of that decision.

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal was required to determine two questions: first, whether Ms Wild was suffering from an ailment or the aggravation of an ailment; and second, if so, whether her employment contributed to that ailment or aggravation to a significant degree. The Tribunal accepted the medical evidence that Ms Wild suffered from carpal tunnel syndrome and bilateral subacromial bursitis, meaning the primary issue was the causal link between her employment and these conditions.

The Tribunal considered conflicting medical opinions regarding the cause of Ms Wild's conditions, with some suggesting constitutional factors and others pointing to the repetitive nature of her work. However, the Tribunal found that Ms Wild's own evidence indicated her work was not significantly repetitive in the manner required to aggravate her conditions. Applying the statutory requirement that an injury must be contributed to to a significant degree by employment for compensation to be payable, the Tribunal concluded, on the balance of probabilities, that Ms Wild's conditions were not significantly contributed to by her employment.

Accordingly, the Tribunal affirmed the decision of the Independent Review Officer dated 16 December 2014, finding that the ailments, or the aggravation of the ailments, suffered by Ms Wild were not contributed to to a significant degree by her employment with the Department of Human Services, as required by the SRC Act.