ZFCC and Comcare (Compensation)

This matter concerned an objection by ZFCC to Comcare's inspection of medical records produced under summons. The dispute arose in the context of a reviewable decision before the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT), presided over by Deputy President Gary Humphries.

The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether ZFCC's objection to Comcare inspecting certain medical records, which ZFCC sought to have redacted, should be allowed. This required the Tribunal to consider the relevance of the summoned material to the issues in dispute and the principles governing access to documents produced under summons.

The Tribunal applied the principles outlined in *Panagiotou and TNT Australia Pty Ltd*, which liken summonses issued by the AAT to court subpoenas. These principles establish a process where documents are produced, objections are considered, and then a decision is made regarding preliminary use, including inspection by parties. The Tribunal reasoned that it could not be safely concluded that the records ZFCC proposed to redact were completely irrelevant to her claim. For instance, information regarding a mastectomy could potentially be relevant to the incidence of pain or trauma in a nearby shoulder. The Tribunal considered that a full picture of ZFCC's medical history might identify other factors potentially contributing to her condition, and that while summonses should not be used as a "fishing exercise," identifying alternative causes of injury could be an incidental benefit. The Tribunal concluded that denying Comcare access to these records might hinder satisfactory conclusions regarding the cause of ZFCC's condition, which was central to the proceedings.

Accordingly, the Tribunal disallowed ZFCC's objection to Comcare inspecting the documents produced through the summonses on the Gungahlin Medical and Surgical Centre.