Young and Comcare (Compensation)

This matter came before Senior Member P Nolan of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal concerning a claim for compensation under the *Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988* (Cth) (SRC Act). The applicant, Mr. Young, sought review of Comcare's decision to affirm its earlier decision that he did not continue to suffer from an injury for the purposes of the SRC Act, nor had he demonstrated a resulting permanent impairment. The applicant's claim stemmed from an accepted episode of Major Depressive Disorder allegedly suffered during his employment with the Department between 2009 and 2013, which he attributed to workplace bullying.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the applicant continued to suffer from an "injury" as defined by the SRC Act, whether any such injury had resulted in a permanent impairment, and if so, whether that impairment met the threshold for compensation. The central dispute revolved around whether the applicant's current depressive symptoms constituted a continuation of the work-related injury or a separate, unrelated episode of a pre-existing condition.

In reaching its decision, the Tribunal considered the medical evidence from two consulting psychiatrists, Dr. Duke for Comcare and Dr. De Leacy for the applicant. While both agreed the applicant had experienced episodes of Major Depressive Disorder over the years, they differed on the cause and nature of his current condition. The Tribunal found Dr. Duke's opinion to be more persuasive, noting that he had previously assessed the applicant and that his findings were supported by earlier medical reports. The Tribunal highlighted several factors supporting Dr. Duke's view, including the applicant's participation in activities inconsistent with ongoing major depressive disorder, such as working as a real estate agent and undertaking an overseas trip, and his failure to engage with suggested treatments. Furthermore, the Tribunal considered that the applicant's current difficulties, such as marital breakdown and challenges in his real estate career, were probable causes for his condition unrelated to the workplace bullying. The Tribunal concluded that the applicant had a pre-existing susceptibility to Major Depressive Disorder, and while his employment may have contributed to a single resolved episode, subsequent episodes were likely caused by factors outside of his work.

Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision under review, finding that the applicant no longer suffered from an injury for the purposes of the SRC Act and that a permanent impairment had not arisen from a work-related injury.