Zenelovski and Comcare (Compensation)

This matter concerned an appeal by Mrs Zenelovski against a decision by Comcare to deny liability for her ongoing wrist pain and associated symptoms. Mrs Zenelovski had been employed by the Department of Defence for many years, undertaking duties that involved significant computer and typing activities. She developed bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome and tendonitis, which were initially accepted as work-related. However, following surgery and a period of leave, her wrist pain persisted, and Comcare subsequently reconsidered and denied liability for further compensation under sections 16 and 19 of the *Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988* (Cth).

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal was required to determine whether Mrs Zenelovski's persistent wrist pain, and any incapacity resulting from it, constituted an "injury" for the purposes of the *Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988* (Cth), and whether such injury arose out of, or was contributed to in a significant degree by, her employment. Specifically, the Tribunal had to assess the medical evidence regarding the cause and persistence of her symptoms and whether they were causally linked to her work duties.

The Tribunal considered evidence from Mrs Zenelovski, her general practitioner Dr Brophy, hand surgeon Mr Thomas, and an occupational physician. Mrs Zenelovski contended that her prolonged work activities, involving repetitive typing and computer use, had caused or aggravated her wrist conditions. Comcare argued that the evidence did not establish a sufficient causal link between her employment and the ongoing symptoms, particularly after her return to work with modified duties. The Tribunal was tasked with weighing the expert medical opinions and the applicant's testimony to determine if the conditions met the statutory definition of an injury under the Act.

The Tribunal ultimately found that Mrs Zenelovski's conditions were injuries arising out of her employment. It accepted the opinions of her treating medical professionals, Dr Brophy and Mr Thomas, who considered her work to have aggravated her conditions over a significant period. Consequently, Comcare's denial of liability was set aside, and the matter was remitted for redetermination of compensation payable under sections 16 and 19 of the *Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988* (Cth).