Wren v Kmart Australia Ltd Summary

CERTIFICATE OF DETERMINATION OF MEMBER
CITATION:	Wren v Kmart Australia Ltd [2025] NSWPIC 450
APPLICANT:	Michael Wren
RESPONDENT:	Kmart Australia Limited
MEMBER:	John Wynyard
DATE OF DECISION:	20 August 2025
DATE OF AMENDMENT:	1 September 2025
CATCHWORDS:	WORKERS COMPENSATION - Workers Compensation Act 1987; claim for lump sum compensation regarding psychiatric injury; whether intellectually disabled worker employed as a door greeter had suffered injury as a result of a confrontation with youths; whether claimant’s motive to punish employer for its alleged lack of concern; whether claimant’s continued employment in same role and subsequent employment a disentitling factor; whether pleadings misconceived; Held – CCTV footage confirmed claimant’s account; the psychological effect of the incident caused aggravation of claimant’s pre-existing post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and major depression; value of independent, contemporaneous documentary evidence by claimant’s psychologist, involvement of professional carers considered and rejected; whether impairment permanent and to what extent the claimant’s pre-existing conditions were relevant; employment found to be the main contributing factor; matter remitted to President for referral.
DETERMINATIONS MADE:	The Commission finds: 1. The applicant suffered an injury whilst employed by the respondent. The Commission orders: 2. I remit this matter to the President for referral to a Medical Assessor for an assessment of whole person impairment on the following bases: Date of injury: 15 February 2021 (deemed). Matter for assessment: psychological/psychiatric injury. Evidence: Application to Resolve a Dispute and attached documents, Reply and attached documents and Application to Lodge Additional Documents from the respondent dated 25 June 2025. A brief statement is attached setting out the Commission’s reasons for the determination.

STATEMENT OF REASONS

BACKGROUND

The applicant, Michael Wren, brings an action against the respondent Kmart Australia Limited for lump sum compensation in respect of an injury that was said to have occurred on a deemed date of 15 February 2021.
Dispute notices were issued and the Application to Resolve a Dispute (ARD) was duly lodged.

ISSUE FOR DETERMINATION

The parties agree that the following issue remains in dispute:
(a) did the applicant suffer an injury?

PROCEDURE BEFORE THE PERSONAL INJURY COMMISSION

The matter was heard on 2 July 2025. The applicant was represented by Mr Phillip Perry of counsel instructed by Ms Nada Najjar. The respondent was represented by Mr Josh Beran instructed by Ms Rosie Petrollo from Messrs Hall & Wilcox and Ms Jade Dunne was observing on MS Teams. Mr Grant Fraser also appeared on MS Teams but was excused during the hearing.
I am satisfied that the parties to the dispute understand the nature of the application and the legal implications of any assertion made in the information supplied. I have used my best endeavours in attempting to bring the parties to the dispute to a settlement acceptable to all of them. I am satisfied that the parties have had sufficient opportunity to explore settlement and that they have been unable to reach an agreed resolution of the dispute.

EVIDENCE

Documentary evidence

The following documents were in evidence before the Personal Injury Commission (Commission) and considered in making this determination:
(a)    ARD and attached documents;
(b)    Reply and attached documents, and
(c)    Application to Lodge Additional Documents lodged 26 June 2025 from the respondent.

Oral evidence

Mr Wren gave some short oral evidence as to the documents contained in the Application to Lodge Additional Documents. He was cross-examined.

FINDINGS AND REASONS

Oral evidence

Mr Perry indicated that he would not have any objection to the tender of the Flourish documents if he was able to call evidence regarding the contents thereof.
Mr Beran objected but I found in the interest of justice that Mr Wren should have an opportunity to explain the alleged discrepancies.
In his evidence Mr Wren confirmed the interaction he had with the young man who threatened him in the subject incident.
He said that afterwards he got another worker to take him to his car where he locked himself in. He attempted to contact his psychologist Kathryn Walker both by phone and by text, and eventually he contacted her. When he got home Mr Wren said he could not calm down or relax and had a very bad night's sleep.
Mr Wren said he saw Kathryn Walker the following day and explained to her how he was feeling.
Mr Wren also said that he told Dr Teoh the truth about how he was feeling when he saw him in 2024.
Mr Perry referred to the entries in the Flourish document which were contained in the Application to Lodge Additional Documents. Mr Wren said he could not recall the name of the person that contacted him from Flourish. He agreed that someone from Flourish would ring him once or twice a day.
He was taken by Mr Perry to the entry for 17 February 2021 and he agreed that he had told the person from Flourish about the events of the of two nights before. He was asked whether he had told the person from Flourish that management had been very supportive following that incident and Mr Wren said that he did not tell management.
Mr Wren was asked whether he had told the Flourish person on 16 February 2021 that he had had a good sleep. Mr Wren denied that he had done so.
Mr Beran in cross-examination asked about the identity of the person from Flourish that had called, Mr Wren said he usually dealt with ‘Kath’, who was the only person that cared about his wellbeing. Mr Wren thought it might have been ‘Jan’ or someone else. He thought it might have been ‘Jim’ (the audio was not distinct).
Mr Wren said he did not have a rapport with that person because it was "just part of their job and not caring."
Mr Wren said that he lodged a discrimination case against the manager at Kmart but denied that he had done so with McDonald's. When asked if he went to Canberra for a discrimination case in December 2021 Mr Wren explained that he went to the Royal Disability Commission which he thought was in 2023.
On further questioning Mr Wren said that he was guessing, but the person who took the notes for 15 May 2021 heard him say that he was going to put an application in to speak to the Disability Royal Commission about Opec Tower employment.
On completion of the cross-examination the documents from Flourish Australia in the respondent's application to admit those documents were admitted.

EVIDENCE

Michael Wren’s statement

Mr Wren made a statement dated 24 March 2025. He stated that he attended school at a special public school for children with special needs/disabilities from 1997 to 2006 when he left in year 12.
He had over 15 years of retail experience and has completed certificates in retail at the Orange TAFE.
Mr Wren suffers from type 1 diabetes and elevated cholesterol for which he is on medication.
He also had a past history of psychiatric illness and disorders. He was seeing a clinical psychologist, Kathyrn Walker, regularly prior to the incident as he has a pre-existing intellectual disability. He had been previously diagnosed with anxiety disorder, depression and obsessive compulsive disorder.
Mr Wren noted that he had support from NDIS.
He commenced with the respondent, Kmart Bathurst, in 2020 where he worked in customer service and stock. He said that he had informed Kmart of his psychiatric history in December 2020, and that his managers were aware of his pre-existing psychiatric disorders.
He said that on 15 February 2021 his shift started at 4.00pm and he was working as a "Customer Greeter" at the store entrance. He was confronted by five or six young males whom he knew had been banned by Kmart management, due to their conduct. He told them they would not be permitted entry into the store and he said they became angry and were abusive and very aggressive towards him. He said:[1]
“9.     At 7pm, one of the young males returned to the store. He pulled out a knife and threatened me, gesturing drawing the knife close to his own throat. He made threatening statements to the effect that he would “get me” when I finished my shift.
10.    I reported this incident to the manager on duty, Anna English but she seemed more concerned as to why I left my post. She showed no concern or compassion as to the seriousness of the incident that had just occurred. I then requested her to call security, which she reluctantly did only after my insistence. Shopping Centre Security arrived and stayed for a while. They then left and I finished my shift at 9pm.
11.    Following this shift, I felt nervous walking to my car alone. I called my psychologist, Kathryn Walker for an hour consultation then went home. I was scared, felt broken and in fear of my life.
12.    I returned to work the following day and informed the store manager, Lisa Morrison who was not aware of the incident. I also reported the incident to Jamie Peters, the store operational manager. He responded with “suck it up if you want to be paid”. I requested to move to the registers or self-service. My request was declined, and I continued to be placed at the entrance of the store.
13.    Kmart management continued to roster me in the customer greeter role. This caused me great anxiety and fear. I feared that the young men would come back and what they would do. I requested two weeks’ notice of being put in the role so that I could mentally prepare for this.”
[1] ARD pages 2-3.
Mr Wren continued to work for the respondent until 9 June 2022 when he commenced employment at Big W to be trained as a Manager.
He left Big W on 18 April 2023 "due to a nervous breakdown."
Whilst working there he said he was constantly anxious and worried that a customer could pose a threat to his safety. He said at [19]:
“As a result of this workplace injury, I am constantly anxious and worrying about my safety. I am easily startled. I still experience a concern that I could be harmed in public. I do not like to go out if I can help it. I have become fearful of people.”

Lisa Morrison’s email

The respondent lodged an email dated 10 February 2022 from Lisa Morrison who was Store Manager at Kmart Bathurst. Relevantly Ms Morrison stated:[2]
[2] Reply page 1.
“….
3. In relation to this incident Michael refused 3 youths entry to the store (no reason why) so they left and went to various other stores in the centre and when they walked past the front of the store they made a comment to him as they pasted [sic] and made a finger gesture which he thought was a knife. Manager on duty was Anna when she became aware of this incident she went to front of store and spoke to Michael and she did say why didn’t you push to talk me so I could come to you. Anna did ask if he was ok and he said yes so she didn’t remove him from the front of store.
Anna should have completed a safety incident which I did speak to her about.
When I became aware of it I asked centre management to review footage for me and to clarify if there was a weapon which they confirmed no but did do a gesture with their hand but left the centre after walking past my store.
On Michael’s next shift I did speak with him asked if was ok and did mention his safety 5 d training and to always call a manager if a situation arises where you feel unsafe and we will come to you and support you.
I also mentioned the employee assistance program to him but said don’t need it. I did ask Michael if he felt comfortable still being on the door and he said yes.
I did say to Michael that the situation should have been handled differently By Anna and I had spoken to her in regards to this and in future if these incidents occur she will handling them differently.
Anna did have a conversation with Michael and apologised to him for how she handling the situation and he did came and say to me he appreciate her coming to check in on him and apologise.
I thought this situation was dealt with...”

Kathryn Walker, clinical psychologist

Kathryn Walker provided a report dated 31 May 2021[3] in which she described Mr Wren's fears of accessing the car park at night following the threats made by the young men on
[3] ARD page 30.
15 February 2021.
Mr Wren also lodged clinical notes by Ms Walker, from 27 April 2018.[4] General practitioner (GP) notes indicated that he had been seeing her since 2016. Mr Wren consulted with
[4] ARD page 362.
[5] ARD Page 363.
Ms Walker on a regular basis, the notes recording regular visits up until 24 June 2023. Over the years there was some variation in the manner in which Mr Wren presented to Ms Walker and she would note his state of hygiene and grooming at the beginning of each session. She would note for example on 28 June 2018 he appeared to be dishevelled, his hair was not done and his clothes had holes in them.[5]
The notes demonstrated that Mr Wren consulted Ms Walker on 2 January 2021,
[6] From ARD page 384.
18 January 2021 and 27 January 2021. Ms Walker's note on 2 January 2021 began "Michael punctual for session. Mood euthymic and affect normal range."[6]
At the next session on 18 January 2021 Ms Walker noted "Michael punctual for his session." "mood improved euthymic and affect reactive normal range."
On 27 January 2021 she recorded "Michael arrived on time. Mood euthymic and affect reactive. Dress and hygiene good (eg hair combed clothing clean)."
The next entry was on 15 February 2021, the day of the injury. The entry stated:[7]
“Session February 15th, 2021
(After hours) Michael phoned and text numerous times requesting my support following a traumatic event at work. Michael was significantly dysregulated and stated that he felt
suicidal. Michael reported that he had been threatened at work by a group of young men approx. 5 who according to Michael were known to Kmart management and had been banned previously. Michael stated that he told the group they were not permitted to enter (Michael was working the front of store). The young men then became aggressive and ne Michael [sic]. Michael stated that they later returned to the store with a knife and gestured ‘slitting the throat’ and told Michael they ‘would get him later in the car park’. Michael said he feared for his life. Michael spoke to his manager who berated him for leaving his position at front of store to come and speak to her. Michael said she did not offer support and told him ‘What do you want me to do’ Michael found this response confusing and felt unsupported. He became upset when recalling manager’s response (emotional).”
[7] ARD page 385.
On 16 February 2021, Ms Walker noted:[8]
“Session February 16th, 2021
Michael punctual for session appeared tired, hair not combed clothing dishevelled. Appeared anxious, eye contact poor and was significantly dysregulated, speech pressured, periods of difficulty finding words.
Michael stated that he had not slept and was feeling ‘very nervous’ and ‘stressed’ and was experiencing images of the incident ‘going over and over in my head’ negative rumination.
Michael does not want to return to work as he does not feel that if the young men returned, he would be safe- worries about going to the carpark at night after his shifts.”
[8] ARD page 386.
The next entry on 11 March 2021, Ms Walker noted Mr Wren's appearance as follows:
“Michael punctual. Hygiene and grooming poor. Marks on clothing, hair not combed.
Appeared tired, mood dysthymic and affect restricted. Eye contact poor, this improved moderately as session progressed.
Main theme of the session included- Michael reported that his checking and OCD features had re-emerged/intensified since incident. Feels discouraged and ‘depressed’ about this lapse. Normalised this response and explained the difference between a lapse and relapse. Michael acknowledged that even though his symptoms had intensified he was not ‘as bad as back then’. Michael also reports ongoing nightmares and flashback’s. Discussed speaking to doctor about sleep disturbances.….."
The following entries all recorded continuing discussions about Mr Wren’s experience on
15 February 2021.

Clinical notes

Cowra Medical Associates

The respondent lodged the clinical notes from Mr Wren’s GPs at Cowra Medical Associates, which dated back to 17 August 2010.[9] Reference was made to many entries therein that confirmed that Mr Wren had a pre-existing psychological condition and the notes demonstrated that he had been on medication for many years prior to the injury. There were, for example, references to anxiety and depression improving on 17 September 2010.
[9] Reply page 52.
On 16 September 2010, the entry by Dr Nazmul Huda recorded:[10]
“very upset distress depressed for 2 /52
Some one sending text message at his mobile since 2/52 they were his best friend few weeks ago they are constantly threatened him to kill him.
he has sleeping problem due to anxiety, not eating and drinking want to kill himself
not safe at home
…”
[10] Reply page 142.
On 10 April 2012 the entry stated that Mr Wren's obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD) symptoms were bothering him at home more than work. He was described as having some troubles with obsessive thoughts, especially relating to a fear of spiders and bubble wrap on 5 June 2012.
An entry on 31 July 2012 stated that Mr Wren had no insight at all into some trouble he was having with his boss.
On 25 September 2012 it was recorded that Mr Wren's response to change was to get angry with people and blame them.
On 1 December 2014 long-term anxiety issues were noted. Mr Wren complained of quitting his job through bullying on 28 October 2015.
He had more treatment on 8 January 2016 regarding his OCD.
On 13 July 2016 it was noted that he was seeing psychologist Kathryn Walker.
On 31 August 2016 he complained about his relationship with Flourish Australia because of bullying and issues with them on the phone. He was often in the company of members of Flourish Australia when he consulted his GPs. On 28 May 2020 he advised that his mental health was very bad and needed to go to the Dubbo clinic again. He was noted every so often down the years as feeling suicidal.
He was noted on 17 June 2020 as having anxiety and not ready to listen to Dr Gupta who was the GP he was seeing at that point. Dr Gupta noted "Giving me hard time".
He developed diabetes and on 11 January 2021 Mr Wren was recorded as saying he was quite anxious and not in the best place mentally.
Further appearances were noted around the time of the incident. He saw Dr Gupta on
12 January 2021 and 11 February 2021 and although he had an appointment on
25 February 2021, he did not appear and next consulted the practice - again Dr Gupta - on
11 March 2021.
He did not report the subject incident to his GP.

Hospital records

The respondent lodged discharge summaries from Bloomfield Hospital, Dubbo Hospital and Cowra Hospital which all demonstrated his longstanding mental instability.
On 11 July 2013 he was transferred to the Bloomfield campus from Cowra ED on a schedule when he was 26 due to concerns about his mental state.[11]
[11] Reply page 38.
He was admitted to Dubbo Base Hospital on 20 April 2023 with several weeks history of low mood, decreased energy, decreased motivation and other psychological symptoms.[12]
[12] Reply page 43.
He was admitted to Dubbo Hospital again on a date that is not apparent, but which bore a date at the bottom of the page of 25 July 2024. It noted that he had been voluntarily admitted to the Baraminya unit,
“for diagnosis and management of a major depressive episode in the context of the new diagnosis of Autism Spectrum Disorder with Intellectual Impairment. This was on a background of previously known intellectual disability as well as past diagnoses of MDD, PTSD, borderline personality disorder and OCD. Michael was supported by the Disability Support Pension and NDIS prior to admission as well as a private psychologist."[13]
[13] Reply page 44.

Dr Teoh

Mr Wren’s expert was Dr Ben Hooi-Beng Teoh, consultant psychiatrist, who reported on
[14] ARD page 14.
28 February 2024.[14]
Dr Teoh took a consistent history of the incident on 15 February 2021. He noted that Mr Wren had daily phone calls to his psychologist. He reported intrusive memories of the incident and that Mr Wren had to cross the street whenever he saw someone who resembled the customer who had threatened him. He suffered anxiety attacks with breathlessness, palpitation and dizziness which could last anywhere between a few minutes to a few hours. Dr Teoh noted that Mr Wren had a pre-existing psychiatric condition which became worse following this incident.
Dr Teoh noted that Mr Wren was admitted to Dubbo Base Hospital Psychiatric Unit in 2023 and that he had had four admissions as a result of depression and suicidal thoughts.
Dr Teoh related Mr Wren's prior psychiatric history, including that he was admitted to Bloomfield Psychiatric Unit in 2013. He recorded that Mr Wren had a history of childhood trauma, and he also noted Mr Wren’s education at a special public school for disability from 1997 to 2006, and that Mr Wren was diagnosed with autism.
Dr Teoh noted on examination:[15]
“He reported significant anxiety and depressive symptoms He has been preoccupied with negative thoughts and lacking motivation. He reported insomnia and nightmares. He has been worrying about his safety, he has been hypervigilant.”
[15] ARD page 17.
Dr Teoh gave the following diagnosis:
“Mr Wren’s presentation is consistent with a diagnosis of a Chronic Post Traumatic Stress Disorder and Major Depression (DSM-V Diagnostic Criteria).”[16]
[16] ARD page 17.
Dr Teoh stated that Mr Wren's condition had been caused by the incident on 15 February 2021 which had aggravated his preexisting psychiatric condition. He advised that Mr Wren's condition had stabilized.

Dr Goodison

Dr Suzanna Goodison, psychiatrist, was retained as the respondent’s expert. In her report of 20 June 2024 she took a history that was consistent with the other accounts of Mr Wren’s background, and of the incident of 15 February 2021. Dr Goodison said:[17]
“There is a clinical background which is of importance, of developmental delay and intellectual disability which is documented in the GP record. He also has an NDIA support worker and has been seeing the clinical psychologist, Ms Kathryn Walker, for anxiety and features of OCD
as well as periods of distress for many years, on a background of developmental trauma growing up.”
[17] Reply page 8.
Dr Goodison related that there had been a background of various admissions to mental health units including Bloomfield Mental Health Unit in 2013. Dr Goodison noted that Mr Wren’s background record of treatment was unrelated to any work-related stress. Dr Goodison noted a traumatic developmental history with the Christmas and Easter periods being fraught for
Mr Wren, and the Christmas period had been the reason for his admission to hospital between 23 December 2019 and 6 January 2020. Dr Goodison also noted that an admission to Dubbo Hospital on 20 April 2023 was not related to workplace stress but rather “depression and an increase in suicidality as he was not coping.”
Dr Goodison reported that Mr Wren had undergone extensive testing in an admission to Dubbo Hospital in April 2023:[18]
“… Mr Michael Wren’s IQ was found to be 58. This is well below the average level and suggests a severe intellectual disability. It is noted that he presents as less impaired than this but clearly does not cope well when under any sort of pressure or stress and makes impulsive poor decisions at times.”
[18] Reply page 9.
Dr Goodison noted the contrast between Mr Wren’s account and that shown on CCTV, which she described:[19]
“I note the incident which Mr Michael Wren is claiming has caused the deterioration of his mental state which allegedly occurred on 15 February 2021. He claims that he was threatened by a group of customers, one of whom had a knife, after they were refused entry into the store by himself. I note the statement from the workplace which states it was unclear why he had in fact refused them entry, as this had not been an instruction from management. I also note the statements from the workplace which outline that CCTV footage was reviewed of this incident and it was noted that there was not a weapon but that one of the youths involved in the group who tried to enter the store, had made some gestures towards him in the CCTV.
Mr Michael Wren when this was put to him, outlined that there was a knife and did not consider any other situation where perhaps he maybe mistook something for a knife, as it indicated there was not one as per the CCTV. However, he remained adamant that one of the individuals did have a knife. He also remained adamant it was only one individual who came back to threaten him with a knife, although the CCTV footage suggests it was the group.”
[19] Reply page 9.
Dr Goodison noted that Mr Wren continued to work at Kmart before leaving, only to commence work at Big W several months later, which work he said he enjoyed. Nonetheless he believed the recent decline in his mental state, which included his 2023 admissions to hospital were as a result of “work-related issues.” Dr Goodison said:[20]
“In my opinion, this is inconsistent with the history and information provided about his functioning as well as the clinical notes from the GP and the hospital.”
[20] ARD page 10.
Dr Goodison referred to the report of Dr Teoh of 28 February 2024. She said:[21]
“…In my opinion, this report does not consider all the non-work-related factors nor the clinical notes that have been provided to me, which outline that his hospital admissions had nothing to do with anything work-related, and were.in fact related to external events and issues, which have been longstanding for Michael (developmental trauma, difficulty functioning at times related to this background as well as his intellectual impairment and the ASD). The report also does not explain that he continued to work at Kmart for some time after this alleged incident, in the same role….”
[21] Reply page 10.
Dr Goodison also observed that Dr Teoh also did not consider Mr Wren’s subsequent work with Big W for almost a year thereafter, but that he then ceased work because of the subject incident. She also noted that Dr Teoh’s report did not account for the variations in cognition and thinking that accompanies an ASD (autism spectrum disorder),
“ie concrete and inflexible, remaining fixated on events and perseverative, something Michael presented as in relation to the incident today, but which was not necessarily based in reality. The incident reported is also not supported by CCTV footage of the incident.”
Dr Goodison noted that Mr Wren had pursued a discrimination case against the respondent, which he had one and received a payout for. She noted that he had brought this action at the end of 2021 and that he received $10,000 in June 2022 and was “essentially asked to resign at that point.” Mr Wren said that the action was because he had been told to work on the door and they would not move him.[22]
[22] Reply page 14.
Later in her report, Dr Goodison said:[23]
“He has a prejudicial upbringing with developmental trauma which is
significant and for which he has received counselling for many years. It is my opinion that this background trauma has likely coloured his view of events which occurred at Kmart where he felt unsupported. His history was also not consistent with having suffered the onset of a disorder related to the incident at Kmart as he managed to function within another role perfectly well. The timing of his leaving Big W he states was related to the incident at Kmart but I found this to be incongruent given it was many years later.”
[23] Reply page 20.
Dr Goodison also observed:
“…The reports were informative from his [hospital] admission in 2023, and clearly outline that there are significant deficits in his functioning and his capacity which may not be initially evident on presentation. In particular, I note his rather black and white style of think [sic], cognitive rigidity or inflexibility. He finds it hard to let go of what has occurred to him at Kmart despite the factual evidence that this was a brief incident, the CCTV footage confirmed that there was no knife and he was not threatened again and he managed to continue at work…”
Again, Dr Goodison said later in her report:[24]
“I did not consider the claimant was deliberately exaggerating or exhibiting inconsistent behaviours. However, his history in itself was inconsistent as he tended to fixate upon a grievance from Kmart; however, this was not reality-based in my opinion or congruent with his clear functioning after the event and his description of enjoyment of day-to- day activities as well as continuing to engage with his church group or current studies….
I did not find him to be pervasively depressed or suffer from an anxiety disorder per se. Rather, he has reactive anxiety and depression related to particular stressors and events which subsides with support. He demonstrated significant cognitive rigidity and black and white thinking which would be consistent with his lower level of intellectual functioning and decreased capacity for this flexibility and therefore he remained fixed on what he perceives he saw rather than the evidence placed to him such as that the individuals were gesturing with their hands and not with a weapon when he was threatened.” (Emphasis added).
[24] Reply page 22.
In answer to a question, Dr Goodison said:[25]
“I do not consider in fact that he experienced an aggravation or acceleration of a pre-existing disease either. He did experience some increase in anxiety which he was able to describe. However, he continued to work and in my opinion was not grossly impaired by this.
…
… He has not got a permanent impairment.”

Flourish Australia
[25] Reply page 25.

The Application to Lodge Additional Documents from the respondent consisted of extracts of records produced by Flourish Australia. These were in the form of notes which consisted of five columns identifying the person by a number, the note number that was being made, the date on which the note was made, and where the worker was. The notes reproduced below represent the pattern generally adopted.
The first record was dated 15 July 2013, and three further entries appeared for different dates to 22 July 2013. The next entry was dated 10 January 2019. The notes for that entry indicated that Flourish Australia was the organization that appeared to have the care of
Mr Wren. There were further visits by representatives from Flourish Australia on 17 January, 24 January and 29 January 2019.
The entries on 31 January 2019 and 13 March 2019 stated:
"Establishment fee claimed for Flourish Australia."
The entry for 13 March 2019 added the words “for NIDS Support.”
Mr Wren was further visited by carers from Flourish on 8 February 2019, 12 February 2019, 21 February 2019 and 26 February 2019. From that point each entry in the notes began with the words "Scheduled visit" and the relevant hours and underneath that heading were the words "NDIS support."
After that entry in the notes occurred at least weekly and up to July 2019 the notes indicated that the carer was assisting Mr Wren by driving him around for various purposes.
From 2 July 2019 however contact was made by phone with an occasional in-person visit. There were for instance phone calls made on 3 July 2019, 5 July 2019, 8 July 2019,
10 July 2019 and then on 11 July 2019 the carer met Mr Wren for his "scheduled support".
Mr Wren spent some time in Orange Base Hospital and Cara Hospital in August/September 2019 and the entries for that time demonstrated that the carers were seeing him almost on a daily basis through September.
The same pattern continued of Flourish Australia staying in touch with Mr Wren by phone and occasionally seeing him in person.
From 23 January 2020 the assistance was limited to phone calls, with the exception of a visit on 19 February 2020.
This same pattern of regular visits in person interspersed with phone call reports persisted through to 17 September 2024 in the notes that have been lodged.
The following entries were made between 12 and 17 February 2021,

2673	6734587	12/2/2021	Bathurst	SCHEDULED PHONE CALL 0830 NDIS SUPPORT I made Micheals call this morning to check on his wellbeing. Michael stated that he didn't sleep well and he thought it was because of the funeral he was attending today of a friend. Michael said he would phone the friend who was transporting to and discuss. I prompted Michael a good morning.
2673	6739871	15/2/2021	Bathurst	SCHEDULED PHONE CALL 0900 HRS NDIS SUPPORT I contacted Michael for support. Stated that he had a good weekend. Working tomorrow from 4-9pm. I prompted Michael good morning.
2673	6744449	16/2/2021	Bathurst	SCHEDULED PHONE CALL 0850 HRS NDIS SUPPORT I contacted Michael for support. Stated that he had a good sleep. Work was fine yesterday. Michael is working again today afternoon. I prompted Michael a good morning.
2673	6749209	17/2/2021	Bathurst	SCHEDULED PHONE CALL 0845 HRS NDIS SUPPORT I contacted Michael for support . Stated that he had a good sleep. Mentioned that on Monday a customer threatened him with a knife . Stated that management were very supportive. Reassurance given with good effect. Today he is going to Tafe. I prompted Michael a good morning.
2673	6750947	17/2/2021	Bathurst	SCHEDULED PHONE CALL 1500 HRS NDIS SUPPORT I contacted Michael for support. Stated that he was having a good day. Michael had support from Resolve today. Mentioned that he did craft activities. I prompted Michael a good afternoon.

On 15 May 2021 the following entry was made, relevantly:
“… Michael then asked to be supported to the Rose Café for breakfast. Michael shared that he was taking legal action against McDonald’s and OPEC employment agency for discriminators [sic] in 2014. Michael also discussed his formal complaint that he had submitted to the State manager of Kmart. Michael was very happy he had received a call from the operations manager of Kmart who advised that action was pending on his complaint…”

SUBMISSIONS

Mr Perry

Mr Perry said that the matter was straightforward and the issue was whether a psychological injury was sustained by Mr Wren on 15 February 2021.
He submitted that there was persuasive contemporaneous documentary support from Kathryn Walker and he referred the four entries prior to the subject event noting that Mr Wren appeared to be in a good place, his mood was stable and his presentation was euthymic.
Mr Perry submitted that this was clearly evidence of an injury and that Dr Teoh’s advice that it was an aggravation of the post-traumatic stress disorder was consistent with the medical history.
Mr Perry referred to the entry in Ms Walker's notes for 11 March 2021 and her observation that Mr Wren's grooming was poor, there were marks on his clothing and his hair was not combed.
He appeared tired with a dysthymic mood and a restrictive effect.
Mr Perry observed that the respondent's expert medical evidence Dr Goodison found that
Mr Wren did not exaggerate or give inconsistent evidence.
Mr Perry noted that Mr Wren had some achievements since this event. He has got back to work doing shifts and has conveyed that he was pleased with himself to the people from Flourish.
Mr Perry submitted that on one view Mr Wren had pushed his position with a disability to the limit of his capacity.
Mr Perry referred to Dr Teoh's account as being accurate.
Mr Perry reiterated that neither Dr Teoh nor Dr Goodison made any adverse comment about Mr Wren's credit. Dr Goodison was satisfied that this was not a case that involved exaggeration or inconsistency.
Mr Perry relied on Dr Teoh's reporting of Mr Wren's symptoms:
“He reported significant anxiety and depressive symptoms. He has been preoccupied with negative thoughts and lacking motivation. He reported insomnia and nightmares. He has been worrying about his safety, he has been hypervigilant.”
“Mr Wren’s presentation is consistent with a diagnosis of a Chronic Post Traumatic Stress Disorder and Major Depression (DSM V Diagnostic Criteria).”
With regards to Dr Goodison's report Mr Perry submitted that she had not provided any logically convincing reason for saying that Mr Wren did not sustain an injury. Mr Perry observed that the notes from Kathryn Walker were available to her, but that Dr Goodison did not make a close analysis of them.
However Dr Goodison accepted that Mr Wren did not exaggerate or give an inconsistent account of the event or his symptoms and Dr Goodison did say that as a result of the event Mr Wren did suffer some increase in anxiety. But Dr Goodison then said that he was able to continue working and was accordingly not grossly impaired by the effects of the event.
Mr Perry said whether it was a moderate increase, a severe increase or any increase in his anxiety, it was the event that was the main contributing factor and the cause of Mr Wren’s injury.
Mr Perry referred to Dr Goodison's hypothesis that no injury had been occasioned because although she conceded that there had been some increase in anxiety, Mr Wren had continued to work and thus there had been no gross impairment. He also referred to
Dr Goodison’s opinion that there was no injury because Mr Wren was already suffering from a premorbid condition of ASD and there was accordingly no DSM-5 disorder.
Mr Perry submitted that it was irrelevant whether a DSM-5 injury had been occasioned, and repeated that, although Dr Goodison had referred to the involvement of Kathryn Walker, she had not carried out a close analysis of her evidence.
Mr Perry concluded by saying that Mr Wren had been confronted by aggressive males on two occasions and on the second occasion he was given an unmistakable indication that there was an intention to kill Mr Wren or cause him grievous bodily harm. As a result
Mr Wren had suffered a psychological/psychiatric injury.

Mr Beran

Mr Beran noted that the pleadings concerned an aggravation and not a frank primary psychiatric condition being caused by this incident. He further said that the pleadings had not been amended. Mr Beran submitted that pleading did matter because the injury was described as an aggravation of a pre-existing condition of a disease.
Mr Beran referred to Mr Wren's statement, submitting that the real issue was not the incident itself but the allegations that no concern was shown to him after that incident.
The emphasis in Mr Wren's statement was, it was submitted, that he requested for his duties to be changed and had taken umbrage that his requests had been ignored.
It was the fact that he was not accommodated after the incident, rather than the incident itself, that had been the cause of this claim, and it was the conduct by the respondent with respect to industrial matters that had caused Mr Wren's grievance.
Mr Beran submitted that an increase in anxiety was not a psychiatric injury, neither indeed was an increase in psychiatric symptomatology. A psychiatric injury had to have a DSM-5 diagnosis.
Mr Beran referred to the fact that Mr Wren had previously spent some time in respite care because of his anxiety.
Mr Beran submitted that Dr Goodison also supported the respondent’s position, namely that an increase in anxiety was not enough to ground a finding of an aggravation of a psychiatric condition.
Mr Beran accepted that Mr Wren perceived this event as being a “bad incident” and there was evidence from the treating psychologist that there was an increase in anxiety, but he posed the question of whether that was enough to support a finding that Mr Wren had suffered a DSM-5 injury of the aggravation of a pre-existing post-traumatic stress disorder.
Mr Beran referred to an email from Lisa Morrison, the Store Manager at Kmart Bathurst, in support of a submission that could not necessarily be accepted that Mr Wren was told to "suck it up" by management once these events had happened.

Mr Beran referred to the CCTV footage that confirmed there had been a gesture and he accepted that there was nothing the respondent could say about Mr Wren's perception that there was a knife involved. Ms Morrison had held the view that, because of what she was told by Mr Wren, he was comfortable still being on the door after this incident.
Mr Beran submitted that the incident had commenced the "industrial sideshow" as he described it.
Mr Beran referred to Mr Wren's allegation that he left Big W on 18 April 2023 because of a nervous breakdown caused by Mr Wren’s concern that a customer would pose a threat to his safety in the same way as the threat had occurred on 15 February 2021.
This history was incorrect, Mr Beran said, for the reason that although Dr Teoh had based his opinions on the assumption that the history was correct, the contents of the GP’s notes demonstrated that this fear had been expressed on earlier occasions.
Complaints of a threat to kill Mr Wren were made as early as 16 September 2010. There were, Mr Beran said, many references to anxiety and depression within the clinical notes. He referred to the entry on 17 September 2021, and he noted that there were trials of SSRI medication in 2012.
Mr Beran referred to many of these entries, such as references to suicide on
31 August 2016, complaining about his OCD on 2 June 2017, and other entries which have been referred to generally in the evidence above.
Mr Beran submitted that the records from Flourish Australia were a reliable indicator of
Mr Wren's personality type, referring to many entries therein, which references are recorded in the transcript. He referred to Mr Wren's admissions to Dubbo Base Hospital and Cowra Hospital.
Mr Beran referred to much of the material that I have referred to above and stated that
Dr Goodison had “in granular detail” set out the pre-existing injuries and subsequent problems that Mr Wren has encountered, including the diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder.
Dr Goodison’s report was more considered than that of Dr Teoh, Mr Beran said, and I would prefer her opinion.

Mr Perry in reply

Mr Perry said that the Flourish documents were of no probative value. The extensive notes by Kathryn Walker and the many consultations that she had conducted with Mr Wren were persuasive, he submitted.
Mr Perry said that the issue was injury, and not the nature of the injury.

DISCUSSION

Injury is defined by s 4 of the Workers Compensation Act 1987 (the 1987 Act):
"‘Injury’ -
(a) means personal injury arising out of or in the course of employment,
(b) includes a
‘disease injury’, which means-
(i) a disease that is contracted by a worker in the course of employment but only if the employment was the main contributing factor to contracting the disease, and
(ii) the aggravation, acceleration, exacerbation or deterioration in the course of employment of any disease, but only if the employment was the main contributing factor to the aggravation, acceleration, exacerbation or deterioration of the disease…”
Section 11A(3) of the 1987 Act provides:
“(3) A ‘psychological injury’ is an injury (as defined in section 4) that is a psychological or psychiatric disorder. The term extends to include the physiological effect of such a disorder on the nervous system.”
Mr Beran opened his case by submitting that some significance should be placed on the manner in which Mr Wren’s case was pleaded. The ARD claimed in the ‘injury details’ that the ‘type of injury’ was:[26]
“Aggravation, acceleration or exacerbation or deterioration of disease.”
[26] ARD page 6.
Under the heading ‘injury description,” the following appeared:
“Aggravation of psychological injury sustained when worker was targeted by customers and threatened with serious harm and death.”
The s 78 Notice dated 20 August 2024 firstly disputed liability on the basis that Mr Wren had not given notice of his injury or his claim.[27] This was not pursued by the respondent.
[27] ARD page 4.
Secondly, the insurer referred to the complex nature of Mr Wren’s condition. The Notice stated:
“We have reviewed and considered the clinical records of Dr Gupta and Ms Walker which outlined the various attendances in relation to pre-existing anxiety, OCD symptoms and depression including suicidal ideation.
We have also reviewed and considered the clinical records of Dubbo Hospital which show you were an inpatient on four occasions in April/May 2023, July/August 2021 and April 2020. The records show a significant history of mental health concerns including diagnoses of autism spectrum disorder, major depressive disorder, post-traumatic stress disorder, obsessive compulsive disorder and borderline personality disorder. The clinical records are over 900 pages long and contain very little reference to your alleged work injury, but rather details of other psychological stressors.”
The Notice also summarised Dr Goodison’s opinion, after her having access to that material:
“Dr Goodison noted that following the incident on 15 February 2021 you did experience some increase in anxiety, however you continued to work and were not grossly impaired by this anxiety. Dr Goodison was of the opinion that you were not suffering from an active DSM 5 disorder.
Dr Goodison was of the opinion that you did not sustain a work-related injury, and therefore did not provide a whole person impairment assessment.”
The Reply clarified the basis of the dispute, as follows:
“1 The Applicant does not suffer a psychological or psychiatric injury as alleged; sections 4, 11A(3) and 11A(7) of the Workers Compensation Act 1987(NSW).
2 Employment was not the main contributing factor to the contraction, aggravation, acceleration, exacerbation or deterioration of a disease as required by section 4(b) of the Workers Compensation Act 1987 (NSW), alternatively, employment was not a substantial contributing factor to the injury sustained by the applicant, as required by section 9A of the Workers Compensation Act 1987 (NSW).
3 The allegations of injury raised by the Applicant were not real events or did not actually occur.”
I note in passing that s 11A(7) has no application, as it is concerned with a claim for weekly payments.
Mr Beran submitted that the pleading in the ARD should be amended because it claimed that there had been an aggravation of a pre-existing psychological condition, when it ought to have been expressed in terms of a frank injury. I did not, with respect, follow
Mr Beran’s logic but it seemed that this submission was based on assumption that the “real issue”, as he described it, was whether Mr Wren had suffered a psychiatric injury as a result of the lack of concern shown to him by Kmart management following the confrontation between Mr Wren and the youth who made the throat slitting gesture.
Mr Beran argued that it was clear from Mr Wren’s statement that the refusal by management of his request to be taken off the door greeting duty had upset Mr Wren, resulting in the “industrial sideshow,” which I took to be a reference not only to these proceedings, but the action he took regarding discrimination, presumably the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal, in which he was awarded $10,000. If Mr Beran’s argument had been correct, it was nonetheless difficult to comprehend why that issue did not also constitute the aggravation of a pre-existing psychiatric condition, rather than a frank injury.
Be that as it may, the evidence demonstrates that the discrimination action regarding the actions of the employer was indeed an industrial sideshow to the substantive issue before me.
The real issue, as notified in the s 78 Notice, was whether Mr Wren had suffered an injury, and reliance was placed on the opinion of Dr Goodison to deny that proposition.
Dr Goodison’s report was of considerable probative value. She embraced the difficult task of analysing the complex history of Mr Wren’s personality and her analysis of the clinical and hospital records was thorough and considered.
There was, however, one aspect of her opinion with which I have some reservations. She accepted that Mr Wren was not deliberately exaggerating or exhibiting inconsistent behaviours, but she found an inconsistency in his fixation with the subject incident.
Dr Goodison found some differences between Mr Wren’s description and that seen on the CCTV footage. As indicated above, she said that the footage, whilst demonstrating some gestures towards Mr Wren, did not confirm his version that the gesturing person in fact had a knife. She noted also that the footage showed that there was more than one antagonist in the confrontation with Mr Wren. Mr Beran’s submission that there was nothing the respondent could say about Mr Wren’s perception that there was a knife was well made. Whether there was a knife or not, it was clear that a threatening motion had been made towards Mr Wren, and his reaction on one view clearly showed it terrified him.
Before moving to that aspect of the evidence, I note that Dr Goodison also raised as an inconsistency that “the statement from the workplace” suggested that it was unclear why
Mr Wren had originally refused the group entry into Kmart, as there had been no instruction from management. The only material from the employer that was before me was the email from the Store Manager, Ms Morrison, of 10 February 2022. The only relevant part of that email was at paragraph 3, where Ms Morrison said:
“In relation to this incident [Mr Wren] refused three youths entry to the store (no reason why) so they left…”
Mr Wren, on the other hand, explained that he had refused entry for the “five or six young males” as he knew they had been banned by Kmart management because of their conduct. If Dr Goodison based her comment on the three words in parenthesis above, as appears to be the case, some reservations must be made as to her partiality. If Mr Wren’s understanding had been incorrect, the employer did not in terms challenge that evidence, and to speculate that the words “no reason why” were to be interpreted as meaning that
Mr Wren had taken things into his own hands and antagonised the youths without any reason, does not demonstrate that Dr Goodison was approaching her function on a totally unbiased basis. There is no suggestion that management had enquired of Mr Wren the reason why he banned entry by these youths, and there is no suggestion that any enquiry was made to confirm that Mr Wren’s statement that they had been banned by management was correct or not. “No reason why” might equally have meant that Ms Morrison had not made that enquiry.
In any event, Dr Goodison was of the view that Mr Wren had not experienced an aggravation or acceleration of a pre-existing disease. Dr Goodison found that there had been “some increase in anxiety” but because he had continued to work, Mr Wren “was not grossly impaired by this.” She also found that Mr Wren “has not got a permanent impairment.”
As indicated above, Dr Goodison accepted that Mr Wren has a developmental background, and suffers from variations in cognition and thinking that is consistent with a person who has an autism spectrum disorder with intellectual impairment. It appears that the diagnosis of autism followed Mr Wren’s latest admission to Dubbo Hospital in 2023. However, as indicated above, the discharge summary noted that this new diagnosis was “on a background of previously known intellectual disability as well as past diagnoses of MDD, PTSD, borderline personality disorder and OCD."[28]
[28] Reply page 44.
Dr Goodison acknowledged that Mr Wren’s perception is that the timing of his departure from his subsequent employment with Big W was related to the subject incident at Kmart. However Dr Goodison discounted that history on the basis that firstly his background trauma had coloured his view of events which occurred at Kmart, and secondly that Mr Wren had managed to function perfectly well following the incident, at both Kmart and Big W.
Dr Goodison thought that the background trauma had caused Mr Wren to feel unsupported, and that he was fixated upon a grievance from Kmart, but that his fixation was not reality-based.
Dr Goodison said, as indicated above:[29]
“He has a prejudicial upbringing with developmental trauma which is significant and for which he has received counselling for many years. It is my opinion that this background trauma has likely coloured his view of events which occurred at Kmart where he felt unsupported. His history was also not consistent with having suffered the onset of a disorder related to the incident at Kmart as he managed to function within another role perfectly well. The timing of his leaving Big W he states was related to the incident at Kmart but I found this to be incongruent given it was many years later.”
[29] Reply page 20.
Dr Goodison pointed to Mr Wren’s clear functioning after the event, his description of enjoyment of day-to-day activities and his continuing to engage with his church group or current studies. She advised that Mr Wren was not suffering from being “pervasively depressed” or “from an anxiety disorder per se” but that rather he had, to repeat:[30]
“….reactive anxiety and depression related to particular stressors and events which subsides with support. He demonstrated significant cognitive rigidity and black and white thinking which would be consistent with his lower level of intellectual functioning and decreased capacity for this flexibility and therefore he remained on what he perceives he saw rather than the evidence placed to him such as that the individuals were gesturing with their hands and not with a weapon when he was threatened.”
[30] Reply page 22.
Dr Goodison has thus returned to a hypothesis that although his subsequent functioning after the subject incident was inconsistent and incongruent with his experiencing an aggravation or acceleration of a pre-existing disease, Mr Wren’s pre-existing condition caused him to perceive that he was in danger when he lacked the mental capability to understand that subsequent investigation, namely the CCTV footage, showed that he was not in the danger he perceived. This is a different hypothesis to the suggestion that Mr Wren’s grievance against Kmart was because he thought he had been unsupported.
It can be seen that Dr Goodison’s opinion thus encompasses theories that Mr Wren’s pre-existing condition has influenced his perception because he felt unsupported at Kmart and also because “the incident” was inconsistent with Mr Wren’s later demonstrated ability to function. As I understood Dr Goodison’s opinion, it was not only his ability to function at Big W but also to continue at Kmart that made it incongruous for Mr Wren to suggest that he left work with Big W because of the subject incident. The evidence shows that he left Big W on 18 April 2023, and was admitted to Dubbo Base Hospital on 20 April 2023.
It follows that there is no support the respondent’s submission that the subject injury should be properly defined as a frank injury, even if its primary submission had been upheld (that
Mr Wren’s motive for bringing this claim had been his disappointment at the way Kmart management had treated him). The respondent’s own expert stated that Mr Wren’s perception that he had been unsupported arose as a result of his pre-existing trauma, which in turn had caused the multiple psychological disorders he was suffering at the time of the subject incident. These included post-traumatic stress disorder, major depressive disorder (MDD), borderline personality disorder, OCD and a pre-morbid autism spectrum disorder. Clearly, therefore, Mr Wren’s perception had been caused by his pre-existing psychological conditions, which in terms of s 11A(3) of the 1987 Act, are psychiatric conditions.
Further, the submission that Mr Wren’s claim was motivated by this disappointment, inasmuch as such a motive can be divined from Dr Goodison’s opinion, must also be rejected. Firstly, Dr Goodison accepted that Mr Wren was not deliberately exaggerating, but that his claim of being threatened with a knife was not supported by the CCTV footage, nor management. Her view was that Mr Wren had fixated on a grievance with Kmart, that was not reality-based. She said:[31]
“I did not consider the claimant was deliberately exaggerating or exhibiting inconsistent behaviours. However, his history in itself was inconsistent as he tended to fixate upon a grievance from Kmart; however, this was not reality-based in my opinion or congruent with his clear functioning after the event and his description of enjoyment of day-to- day activities as well as continuing to engage with his church group or current studies.”
[31] Reply page 22.
This opinion would appear to be the basis of the clarification in the Reply that
Mr Wren’s allegations of injury “were not real events or did not actually occur”. However,
Mr Beran’s concession that there was nothing the respondent could say about Mr Wren’s perception was a reflection of the probative value of the CCTV footage. It showed not only that a youth made a throat slitting gesture to Mr Wren (notwithstanding that no knife was seen) and that he was confronted not by the one youth, as he thought, but several.
Moreover, there was independent contemporaneous documentary proof that this incident terrified Mr Wren, in the form of the notes from his psychologist, Kathryn Walker. Mr Beran said all that could be said in support of an argument that the contemporaneous notes from the Flourish organisation should be preferred, but the pro forma entries in Flourish’s diary demonstrate that it is more likely that there was an unfortunate lack of attention paid to
Mr Wren’s condition following the incident on 15 February 2021. The contrast between the entry by person number 2673 in the Flourish diary for 16 February 2021, which recorded that Mr Wren had a “good sleep” and that “work was fine yesterday”, and the entry in Ms Walker’s diary on 15 February 2021 immediately after Mr Wren had got to his motor vehicle was stark.
Ms Walker recorded the sequence of events detailed by Mr Wren as to the incident with the youths, and the response of management (which Ms Morrison herself admitted was less than ideal, with her having to reprimand the manager on duty at the time). Ms Walker recorded that Mr Wren had “phoned and texted numerous times”, that he “feared for his life and “felt suicidal”. Moreover Ms Walker recorded another entry in her diary the next day,
16 February 2021, that indicated that Mr Wren was tired with uncombed hair and dishevelled clothing when he attended. Ms Walker noted further that Mr Wren was “very nervous”, “stressed” and having flashbacks of the confrontation. She recorded that he did not wish to return to work and was worried about going to the car park at night.
Person number 2673 eventually noted the incident on 17 February 2021, as can be seen from the diary reproduced above. The entry recorded that Mr Wren had “a good sleep” but then mentioned that “a customer had threatened him with a knife” on Monday. The entry also stated that “management were very supportive”.
These entries were the subject of the oral evidence which I related earlier in these reasons. I do not accept either that Mr Wren had a good sleep, or that management was very supportive. Bearing in mind Mr Wren’s particular psychological problems it cannot confidently be said that he did not give those responses over the telephone during his scheduled phone call. However, he denied that he had done so, and the subsequent entries in Ms Walker’s reports demonstrate that at no time has Mr Wren accepted that management had been supportive.
Further entries[32] in her diary demonstrated that Ms Walker telephoned Mr Wren on
[32] From ARD page 387.
18 February 2021 to be told that he was speaking to management about the handling of the matter on the night of the assault. On his next attendance, 11 March 2021 Ms Walker recorded that Mr Wren look tired, his hair had not been combed and he had dirty clothing. She recorded further that Mr Wren’s OCD symptoms had reemerged and intensified since the incident, that he continued to experience nightmares and flashbacks, that his diabetes control was not being managed well since the incident, and that he was seeing Claire from Flourish regarding NDIS support.

On 19 March 2021, Ms Walker recorded amongst other things that Mr Wren was suffering sleep deprivation due to an increase in checking his phone and also negative rumination which had increased significantly since the incident. On 26 March 2021 Ms Walker noted that Mr Wren had a sense of hopelessness about getting better both emotionally and physically and believed that the incident negatively impacted his future employment.
As the sessions continued through April 2021 Ms Walker reported that Mr Wren demonstrated concern that management would not address his concerns about the incident, that he had a sense of not feeling safe when thinking about leaving the house. On
23 April 2021 Ms Walker recorded that the main theme of the session was that Mr Wren was experiencing intense fear, that he felt overwhelmed when he was reminded of the incident either directly by others speaking about the details, or indirectly when he sees young men that look similar. On 3 May 2021 Ms Walker noted that Mr Wren became distressed when discussing the actions of management at the time of the incident, and by 20 May 2021
Ms Walker noted that Mr Wren was experiencing daily rumination about the “lack of support” and lack of follow-up regarding his welfare from management. Ms Walker indicated that
Mr Wren had phoned her 5 to 10 times consecutively and that he had acknowledged the correlation between increased stress levels and the intensity of his OCD symptoms.
Ms Walker has been Mr Wren’s psychologist since sometime in 2016. It has not been possible, bearing in mind that these reasons are supposed to be “brief,” to detail the positive and effective treatment with which she has managed Mr Wren’s complex personality, but the detail with which she has both recorded Mr Wren’s symptoms and afforded him appropriate psychological treatment is of compelling probative weight. In contrast, I do not find that the repetitive type entries in the Flourish diary to evidence anything more than an inadequate method to support Mr Wren.
Although Dr Teoh’s report was not as comprehensive as that of Dr Goodison, nonetheless it has not been demonstrated that the facts on which he made his assumptions were incorrect or that indeed his diagnosis cannot be relied on. He took an accurate history of Mr Wren’s background, and he noted the intrusive memories of the incident (recorded also by
Ms Walker in the form of rumination and flashbacks), which he described as negative thoughts, lack of motivation, insomnia and nightmares.
Dr Teoh found that Mr Wren’s presentation was consistent with a diagnosis of chronic post-traumatic stress disorder and major depression, and that his condition had been caused by the incident on 15 February 2021, in the nature of an aggravation of his pre-existing psychiatric condition. That diagnosis is consistent with the extensive medical record and in particular the diagnosis given in the discharge summary of Dubbo Hospital dated
20 April 2023, which found that he suffered from a number of psychological injuries, including post-traumatic stress disorder, as was found by Dr Teoh and major depressive disorder, also found by Dr Teoh. I accept that both conditions are defined by DSM 5 Diagnostic Criteria, as indicated by Dr Teoh.
It follows that I am satisfied that Mr Wren’s employment was the main contributing factor to the aggravation of his post-traumatic stress disorder and major depressive disorder and I accordingly make the above order. Whilst questions of whether the injury has caused permanent impairment and the significance of Mr Wren’s pre-existing conditions will in all probability be relevant questions for the Medical Assessor, they are not within the purview of this enquiry. This has been an unusually complex case and Mr Wren’s determination in the face of his challenges in life should be acknowledged and recognised.

Wren v Kmart Australia Ltd

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established