Wood and Comcare (Compensation)

This matter concerned an appeal by Ms Wood against a decision by Comcare regarding her entitlement to workers' compensation. Ms Wood had previously accepted conditions of tenosynovitis and chronic pain syndrome, for which she had received compensation for over 15 years. However, new medical evidence had emerged, suggesting alternative diagnoses including osteoarthritis of the thumbs and carpal tunnel syndrome, and questioning the original diagnoses. The central dispute revolved around whether Ms Wood's current symptoms were contributed to by her employment to the requisite degree, and whether the medical treatment she had received was reasonably obtained in relation to compensable conditions.

The court was required to determine the correct diagnosis of Ms Wood's condition, the causal link between her employment and any diagnosed conditions, and the reasonableness of medical treatment obtained. Specifically, the court had to consider whether the initial diagnoses of tenosynovitis and chronic pain syndrome were accurate, given the more recent specialist medical evidence. This involved assessing the weight to be given to the opinions of Professor Youssef and Dr Kostos, who disagreed with the earlier diagnoses, and comparing them with the views of Dr Harrex, who considered the historical diagnoses reasonable.

The court reasoned that the outcome of the case was critically dependent on the medical evidence. It noted that the initial medical evidence supporting Ms Wood's accepted conditions was surprisingly thin, with little specialist assessment or exploration of alternative diagnoses over many years. The court found that the opinions of the specialists Ms Wood had recently seen, particularly Professor Youssef and Dr Kostos, were highly relevant and likely to be preferred. These specialists agreed that Ms Wood suffered from generalised underlying degenerative osteoarthritis, particularly affecting her thumbs, and that she had had this condition for an extended period. Professor Youssef also inferred that Ms Wood likely had or had carpal tunnel syndrome, a diagnosis Dr Kostos was unwilling to make due to the absence of clear signs. Crucially, neither Professor Youssef nor Dr Kostos accepted tenosynovitis or chronic pain syndrome as a correct or probable diagnosis. Relying on the expert opinion of Professor Youssef, the court concluded that none of Ms Wood's conditions were work-caused.

Consequently, the decision under review was set aside.