Wirth and Comcare (Compensation)

This matter concerned two applications before the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. The first application, 2016/5274, sought review of a decision concerning the Applicant's right shoulder injury. The second application, 2018/7300, sought review of a decision affirming a refusal to extend time for reconsideration of a determination that Comcare was not liable for a left knee replacement. The Applicant contended that both her right shoulder and left knee injuries arose out of or in the course of her employment as an administrative service officer with the Bureau of Meteorology.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the Applicant's right shoulder injury sustained on 20 November 2009 occurred in the course of her employment. It also needed to consider the impact of pre-existing degenerative changes, age, and weight on the Applicant's left knee condition, and whether this condition remained related to her employment, particularly in light of a medical opinion suggesting it was constitutional.

The Tribunal accepted the Applicant's evidence regarding the 20 November 2009 incident, finding her to be a reliable witness whose account was consistent with contemporaneous documents. The Tribunal noted that the employer's contention that the Applicant was not required to deliver mail on that day was not supported by viva voce evidence from her supervisor, and inferred that such evidence would not have assisted the Respondent. Consequently, the Tribunal found that the Applicant's right shoulder injury arose in the course of her employment, acknowledging pre-existing degenerative changes consistent with her age. Regarding the left knee, the Tribunal considered a medical opinion that attributed the condition to constitutional, age, and weight-related factors, and not work-related aggravation.

In application 2016/5274, the first reviewable decision was set aside, and it was ordered that the Applicant suffered from her right shoulder injury sustained on 20 November 2009, arising out of her employment, requiring medical treatment under section 16 of the SRC Act. The Respondent was ordered to pay the Applicant's costs. In application 2018/7300, the time for the Applicant to request reconsideration of the second reviewable decision was extended to 10 October 2018, and the second reviewable decision was affirmed.