Workers Compensation Archives - https://www.bpclaw.com.au

May 16

Injured While Volunteering? Can You Receive Compensation?

Everyone knows that if you are injured while on the job or in the course of your employment, there is compensation available to help offset the costs of your injury. Likewise, as a general member of the public you have rights that protect you in the case of public injury or injury on a business owner’s property. However, what are you entitled to as someone that accepts some risk of injury while not being fully eligible to the benefits of an actual employee? In other words, you’re one of the growing tens of thousands of people in Australia who undertake some form of volunteer work.

What is a Volunteer?

A volunteer is generally defined as a person who provides services for a business or other profit generating entity for free. Volunteers may, however, receive other forms of compensation like expenses costs for travel, food, or housing.

Workers versus Volunteers

At a basic level, volunteers don’t have the legal standing are not the same as employed workers. They are providing services on an unpaid basis, are not in the system, do not provide the employer with any information, and are not given benefits. However, the volunteer is still acting as an employee in many ways, despite the general lack of commercial control over their actions. There may be overlap where a volunteer’s duties exceed the scope of a ‘volunteer’ and spills over into that of a paid worker. For instance, many volunteers are paid in some honorarium capacity.

However, the law in most states and territories of Australia mostly bars volunteers from receiving benefits from worker’s compensation claims, but there may be exceptions. Therefore it is important to check that the organisation you volunteer for has insurance that adequately covers you and the activities you are carrying out when volunteering and to what extent.

Duty of Care Owed to Volunteers

As mentioned above, volunteers DO have an opportunity to receive compensation for injuries sustained during the course of their service. This is because an employer does, in fact, owe a volunteer a general duty of care; meaning that they will be liable for the costs and damages sustained by a volunteer who is injured while engaged with the employee.

The Work Health and Safety Act 2011 (NSW) extends to someone who ‘carries out work in any capacity for a person conducting a business or undertaking’, inclusive of ‘a volunteer’ (s 7). In some circumstances, volunteers might even be considered as employees for workers’ compensation purposes (Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998 (NSW) sch 1).

Volunteer organisations still have the responsibility of ensuring the health and safety of all people who enter their premises. It is, therefore, the responsibility of organisation to maintain coverage in case of a breach of duty, whether inadvertent or otherwise. Additionally, the organisation that you are volunteering for has an affirmative duty to reduce the number of risks its employees and volunteers are exposed to, including monitoring the safety of your environment, the nature of the work, and the general level of risk volunteers are generally exposed to.

Australian Work Health and Safety Act

Relevant Workplace Health & Safety legislation in Australia does, in fact, recognise volunteers as workers and will protect the physical and mental health of a volunteer in the same way that it would protect a registered employee and most organisations are covered under the legislation. Consequently, both the organisation and the volunteer benefit: The volunteers are covered in the unfortunate event that they are injured in the course of business and the organisation is protected by if they in some way contribute to the injury of an employee or volunteer.

Contact a Lawyer Today

Volunteers are a vital part of any economy, and they deserve to have the same protections as regularly employed individuals. Luckily, there is compensation available for volunteers who are injured in the course of their duties in Australia. If you have been injured in your capacity as a volunteer, strict time limits apply to these matters. Contact BPC Lawyers today.

Feb 23

Injured at work? Am I Entitled to Workers Compensation, contact BPC Lawyers today.

I Have Been Injured on My Way to Work. Am I Entitled to Workers Compensation?

A worker who is injured at work is entitled to compensation benefits including (subject to restrictions) payment of medical expenses, compensation for wage loss, and compensation for permanent impairment suffered.

But what about traveling to work? Are you covered?

Travel to and from work

Ordinarily, you will not be covered for travel to and from your home to your place of work. It did always used to be the case however, recent changes have restricted the scope of workers compensation; Section 10 Workers Compensation Act 1987 (NSW).

However, once you reach work, further travel during work hours can be covered.

Exception – Travelling to work/work site for work sake

As you can appreciate, workers compensation law must determine who is covered in all types of work. Some industries see workers travel straight from home out to a work site, or are road based, such as truck drivers.

It is to those types of working based situations that the law protects. What needs to be established is that there is a, “a real and substantial connection between the employment and the accident or incident out of which the personal injury arose.” Section 10 (3A) Workers Compensation Act 1987 (NSW).

It is well settled that a worker, during their employment, can be on a journey from a place of abode to a place of employment at the same time. For example, in the case of Hooke v Rolfe (1986) 7 NSWLR 40, the New South Wales Court of Appeal was under no hesitation to find that motor vehicle accident can have multiple purposes in the sense of being both for employment purposes and for travelling to or from places of abode.

Hence, if your job is one which by its very nature requires you to travel, or even better you’re paid to travel for work, then you may have a claim under a whole number of different provisions designed to grant a positive right to compensation: Harvard v Illawarra Meat Co Ltd [1956] WCR 4 and Thompson v Lewisham Hospital [1978] WCR 111.

We have run many of these cases with great success.

In the matter of Zammit v The Bush Doctor (NSW) Pty Limited (2014) (Unreported 14 September 2014), an employee was employed to attend various bush sites to use pesticide.

He was driving his own motor vehicle and suffered a crash when a spider climbed up his arm. He was taking tools and products (herbicide) to the work site where he was directed to go by his employer. He was paid an extra allowance for the travel.

Hence, the Senior Arbitrator (now Presidential member) Michael Snell (as in Maurino v Amberlor Pty Limited (1996) 14 NSWCCR 16) found in favour of the injured worker and found that this was not just a trip to work, but was a part of his work duties; thus, he was awarded workers compensation entitlements.

Conclusion

Many workers, like us lawyers, are office based. We travel from home to work by car, bus, train, ferry, bike or even just using our legs. Many injuries are suffered on our way to work (many at no fault of our own).

Regrettably, most workers have lost their right to workers compensation in these circumstances.

However, there are exceptions. To know if you fall into one of these exceptions, we need to look at the whole work situation – your employment contract, what you’re paid for, duties performed and the reasons for your travel.

If you’re injured in a motor vehicle it is best to contact our office to ensure that you obtain full access to any entitlements you may have.

Oct 06

Lodging a Worker’s Compensation Claim form. Contact BPC Lawyers for Consultation.

Lodging a Worker’s Compensation Claim form – when and why?

A worker who is injured at work is entitled to compensation benefits including (subject to restrictions) payment of medical expenses, compensation for wage loss and compensation for permanent impairment suffered.

Injuries suffered in the course of employment can often need little by way of time off work or treatment. However, even the most innocuous incident can lead to considerable financial and medically disastrous results. They can, at first, seem not to have caused much by way of damage. However, it can take considerable time for symptoms to materialise or an employee may fear for their job if they make a claim.

When?

It’s imperative that workers lodge incident reports and workers compensation claim forms for all incidents to which they have suffered injury. These forms are available from your employer and must be provided upon request. It is also advisable to seek medical attention by your local medical physician so that your medical condition is documented and you obtain an opinion as to the severity of your condition. This claim form must be as comprehensive in detail as possible, including all injuries suffered, even when the symptoms seem mild at the time.

Why?

The Workers Compensation legislation sets time limits for the lodgement of claims. Any delay could mean that you lose the right to compensation. You must inform your employer that you have suffered an injury as soon as possible: Section 254 Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998 (NSW).

If you did not inform your employer and wish to make a claim, you must show special circumstances, including:

That the employer hasn’t been placed into a position of disadvantage in responding to or dealing with your claim,
You did not tell your employer due to your “ignorance, mistake, absence from the State or other reasonable cause”,
Your employer knew about your injury anyway, or
Your employer reported the circumstances to the nominal insurer.

You must also then lodge your claim for compensation within 6 months of the injury: Section 261 Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998 (NSW).

If you lodge a claim after the six month period, you must show special circumstances, including:

You didn’t lodge you claim in time due to some ignorance, mistake, absence from the State or other reasonable cause AND you made the claim within 3 years of your injury;
You didn’t lodge a claim in time due to some ignorance, mistake, absence from the State or other reasonable cause AND your work incident has caused serious and permanent disablement;
The insurer accepts your claim and fails to mention this issue, or
Your injury was only realised after the incident and you have complied with one of the conditions listed above.

Conclusion

We strongly advise you to immediately lodge a claim for workers compensation and notify your employer of any injury. This will ensure your rights to compensation aren’t taken away from you, especially if there is a delayed or late onset of a serious condition. Indeed, I have come across many situations where employers have attempted to convince workers not to make workers compensation claims, instead agreeing to meet their time off work and treatment expenses themselves. Whilst workers may wish to keep their employer happy for reasons of job security, it must always be borne in mind that such agreements with your employer are far from secured long term. Given the protection from termination for 6 months from your claim (Section 248 Workers Compensation Act 1987) and the common uncertainty as to how long your condition may take to recover, the prudent course must be to lodge a claim for workers compensation. Should your condition require surgery, or seems to be causing you serious and permanent financial and medical hardship, you should contact our office in order to seek advice as to what other rights you might have to compensation.

Timothy Driscoll LLM (Sydney) Associate of BPC 4 October 2017

Aug 18

Can I be fired whilst on Workers Compensation?

Apart from the payment of workers compensation, an employer has an obligation to rehabilitate the injured worker, including, where able, to facilitate the worker into another position; whether that be within or out of the organisation.

However, as is becoming more apparent, employers are finding it easier to simply get workers off their books than having to deal with their rigorous obligations for the payment of compensation, rehabilitation and redeployment of workers.

So if you’re a worker who has suffered an injury at work and your employment has been terminated, what can you do? What rights are you afforded?

An injured worker is afforded some protection from termination under Part 8 of the Workers Compensation Act 1987 (NSW).

The extent of protection will however depend upon:

Whether you’re fit to perform your pre-injury job, and/or
The reasons for why your employer terminated your employment.

Unfit to work in pre-injury employment

If you cannot do the inherent requirements of your job, your employer can terminate you.

However, it is a criminal offence for your employer to terminate your employment because you’re unable to perform such requirements because of a work injury IF they terminate you within 6 months from when you first become unfit for your pre-injury job.

Whilst this prohibition is a criminal provision, the conduct of your employer in terminating you because you make a claim for workers compensation will create a civil liability upon your employer, to which you can sue for modest compensation under the protections found in the Fair Work Act (Cwth).

This protection is only available to you if you comply with any reasonable request the employer makes to send you for a medical examination on the matter.

Fit to work in pre-injury employment

If an employer terminates your employment because you’re unfit for work (so they allege) due to a work injury which you’re fit to perform, then another remedy might be available to you.

If, after termination, you send your employer a medical certificate certifying you’re able to do you pre-injury job or another job up to the same vantage point as your old job, then the employer must reinstate you into that position which you have capacity.

Interestingly, if your employer wishes to allege that you’re not entitled to reinstatement as your injury is not work related, then they must overcome a presumption that says otherwise. That is, it is up to them to rebut a presumption that your termination was because of some non-work related condition.

Conclusion

The general rule has always been that an employer can terminate your employment for any reason at any time.

That still remains the general proposition at law.

But depending on the reasons or reasonableness for their decision might determine if and to what extent you can seek a Court or Tribunal to correct the effect of this decision.

For workers injured in the course of their employment, the Workers Compensation Legislation works (or at least is designed to work) hand in hand with the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cwth) to provide assistance above that of the ordinary worker who has had their employment terminated. However, as is seen in this article, the Court/Tribunals can have great difficulty in providing a fruitful remedy to an employer’s termination notice.

The question is what avenue best achieves the best outcome for the worker?

This is a question of fact and degree of the particular case, to which will need assessment by a competent legal advisor within the area.

If you have been seriously injured at work and are worried about the future in the workforce, then you should contact our office right away and speak to one of our accredited specialists.

Timothy Driscoll

Associate

14 August 2017

Mar 08

Nervous Shock Claims

Workplace incident at Barangaroo – Nervous Shock Claim

Lawyers have represented vast numbers of plaintiffs in successful nervous shock claims pursuant to the NSW Civil Liability Act 2002 since its inception.

Nervous shock claims can be brought by persons who have witnessed, at the scene, a victim being killed, injured or put in peril if it is accepted by the Court that they have genuine psychiatric illness arising from a circumstance that the defendant ought to have foreseen to be capable of causing a person of normal fortitude to suffer a recognisable psychiatric illness if reasonable care were not taken.

If a genuine psychiatric injury is suffered by a close member of the family of the victim who was killed, injured or put in peril, they need not have witnessed, at the scene, the relevant event.

The Civil Liability Act defines a “close member of the family” of a victim to include a parent of the victim or other persons with parental responsibility for the victim, or the spousal partner of the victim, or a child or step-child of the victim or any other person for whom the victim who has parental responsibility. The definition extends to siblings, half-brothers or half-sisters, step-brothers and step-sisters.

A “spouse or partner” is defined as a husband or wife or a defacto partner.

The Diagnostic Statistic of Psychiatric Injuries is used by qualified psychiatrists to report to the Courts on behalf of parties to litigation in relation to the effect that a particular event has had upon any witness to an event causing psychiatric injury.

Strict time limits apply in relation to bringing a claim for damages for personal injury, including psychiatric injury, pursuant to the Civil Liability Act. A three year limitation period is imposed in relation to commencement of court proceedings, which runs from the date of the relevant event.

It is expected that in relation to the unfortunate death of an innocent worker at Barangaroo in March 2017, there will be a coronial inquest that will shed light upon the circumstances that led to the death.

The findings of a coroner should not be pre-empted.

Any persons who have witnessed, and been psychologically affected by the unfortunate incident at Barangaroo are advised to consult medical practitioners for appropriate treatment.

Claims for damages for pure mental harm or nervous shock should only be brought by individuals who have suffered very significant psychological injury as a result of a particular event. The court process usually endures for beyond 18 months if matters are incapable of settlement.

The Civil Liability Act is designed to provide appropriate compensation to persons with significant injuries that negatively impact upon their ability to earn an income and which give rise to significant medical expenses.

The Courts, quite rightly, do not readily entertain cases that do not involve genuine psychiatric injury, as was intended by the legislators when the Civil Liability Act NSW 2002 was enacted.

BPC Lawyers have acted for injured plaintiffs for in excess of 35 years.

If you or one of your loved ones is affected by psychiatric injury which remains unresolved despite medical treatment, please contact one of our accredited specialists in personal injury law in NSW for a free initial consultation.

BPC Lawyers act in nervous shock claims on a “no win/no fee” basis.

In cases involving serious injury or death, there will usually be a coronial inquest following police investigations and WorkCover/WorkSafe investigations.

BPC Lawyers have assisted family members to protect their compensation rights by appearing in numerous coronial inquests, including those involving construction site accidents and deaths.

BPC Lawyers take very seriously their duty to only bring cases on behalf of persons in circumstances where there is at the very least, a reasonable prospect of success, which is consistent with our obligations pursuant to the Legal Profession Uniform Law.

Aug 22

Cross-Examination: Making Life Easier in the Witness Box

I hope for your sake that you never have to be cross-examined; it is never an easy or pleasant experience.

Questions are often confusing and repetitive and it is difficult in the moment to determine exactly the right words to use. I have been required to give evidence on several occasions and have never enjoyed the experience.

There are however a few simple rules that can make life easier. For example, a witness should never use the term “never”. Never is a very long time and our memory is not perfect, particularly under pressure. Had Barry O’Farrell, received this advice he may not have lost his job.

I tend to think that Mr O’Farrell was being honest when he suggested that he had “never” received a bottle of Grange, but if he had not been so dogmatic and replied, for example, “I do not recall ever having been given a bottle of Grange”, he would not have been in the same predicament.

If you are likely to give evidence in the near future you should ask your lawyer about what to expect and how you should deal with questions as they arise.

If you would like to discuss the rules of giving evidence, you can contact our Scott Hall-Johnston, or one of the other lawyers at BPC, to discuss the other rules about giving evidence.
About BPC: BPC provides people with workers compensation claims, motor accident claims and public liability claims. BPC has its origins in a legal practice started by Barry Beilby in 1975.

Jul 11

Permanent Impairment Benefits And The High Court Decision Of Goudappel

Permanent impairment benefits and the High Court decision of Goudappel. The good, bad and the ugly…

On 16 May 2014 the High Court of Australia full bench (5 Judges) handed down its decision.
Unfortunately, the High Court unanimously upheld the Appeal and reversed the NSW Court of Appeal’s decision.
They did so in very brief fashion – some 67 paragraphs (ironically the same number as the provision which at one time gave pain and suffering benefits!).
The effect of this decision has caused much a headache for both an injured worker and WorkCover.
For workers, the decision effectively confirms the following.
Firstly, there are 2 sets of rules – those who made a claim for permanent impairment benefits before 19 June 2012 and those who did not.
Depending on when your claim for permanent impairment benefits (if any) has been made will depend on which system applies to your permanent impairment claim

The Bad – The 2 Systems

Specific claim for permanent impairment benefits before 19 June 2012

i. Your are entitled to permanent impairment compensation for WPI or Permanent loss under Table of Maims (for pre 2002 injuries) above 0%

ii. If you are 10% WPI or received $10,000 or more under the Table of Maims, you are entitled to compensation for pain and suffering between $1 and $50,000.

iii. You can make as many claims as you want if/when you condition deteriorates.

For Workers who have NOT made a specific claim for permanent impairment benefits before 19 June 2012

i. You must reach 11% WPI to get any compensation

ii. You can only make one claim, and

iii. You cannot get any additional compensation for pain and suffering.

Which one applies to me?

Only those injured workers who have made a specific claim for permanent impairment benefits in writing before 19 June 2012 come under the first system.
Normally workers injured will fill in a standard claim. The ordinary/general claim form is not sufficient.
So if you injured yourself at work after 18 June 2012 or made a claim for permanent impairment benefits (even if you made you original claim) after 19 June 2012 then you fall under the old system.

The Ugly – The dilemma for WorkCover

As I have previously reported, the NSW Court of Appeal reversed the NSW Workers Compensation Commission’s decision effectively finding that if you made any claim for compensation before 19 June 2012 then the old provisions applied.
WorkCover, on this advice, implemented its policy that it would pay workers in accordance with this decision.
However, now that the High Court has reversed this decision, the question remains as to how WorkCover is to deal with current claims on foot.

WorkCover’s Response

If an injured worker and a Scheme agent (or the representatives) have agreed in writing to the payment of permanent impairment compensation in accordance with the NSW Court of Appeal’s decision they will meet that agreement and pay that compensation.
The effect of WorkCover’s agreement is that if you have agreed or have in fact been paid under the old scheme when you had no right to then, WorkCover will not come after you to reclaim this money.
If however, your claim was not agreed at the time of the High Court Judgment on 19 May 2014 then you will miss out.

The Good – What has happened since the High Court decision?

Some reprieve came for workers who made a claim for permanent impairment benefits before 19 June 2012.
It was thought that if workers decided to seek a top up of permanent impairment benefits due to their condition deteriorating, then that claim would be brought after 19 June 2012 and thus come under the new scheme.
That issue (to date) has been resolved. The Workers Compensation Commission determined that the 1^st system would apply in all of its glory: Cauldield v Whelan Kartaway Pty Limited (2014) NSWCC PD 34.
However, WorkCover may want to appeal this decision.
The Scheme Agent themselves, however, cannot, as to do so would raise an issue not submitted/contended before the Commission. However, another scheme agent may wish to bring another ‘test case’ and challenge this decision in the Courts at a future date.
Time will tell…

8 July 2014.

About BPC Lawyers: BPC Lawyers provides people with workers compensation claims, motor accident claims and public liability claims. BPC Lawyers has its origins in a legal practice started by Barry Beilby in 1975.

Jun 21

rights for Compensation for Permanent Impairment

Court of Appeal Decision on Worker’s Right to Lump Sum Payment

Workers Compensation Update

Your rights for Compensation for Permanent Impairment – Case note: Gaudappel v Adco Constructions Pty Ltd (2013) NSW CA 94

Traditionally, the New South Wales scheme of Workers Compensation has provided an injured worker for ongoing entitlements to compensation provided they could establish their employment was a substantial contributing factor for their need.

The three main entitlements were:

Payment of your work injury-related medical expenses,
Weekly wage compensation for incapacity to earn because of your work-related condition, and
A small sum for any Permanent impairment caused by your work-related injury.

The new Workers Compensation Scheme has seriously eroded these rights, including an injured worker’s right to benefits for permanent impairment.

A right to benefits for permanent impairment is a right not often know by workers and rarely disclosed by the insurer/scheme agent.

Under the new scheme, a worker has to prove that their work-related injury results in a 11% or greater Whole Person Impairment rating.

It may not sound much, but this is a very high threshold to overcome.

However, there may be some relief for those who made a claim for workers compensation BEFORE 19 June 2012.

The New South Wales Court of Appeal has upheld an Appeal by an injured worker claiming benefits for a Permanent Impairment suffered as a result of his employment.

The claim was for less than 11% Whole Person Impairment.

He argued that as he had made a claim for compensation before 19 June 2012 then he did not need to meet the 11% threshold.

In essence, this decision provides that if you have suffered an injury and made a claim for Worker’s Compensation in any form before 19 June 2012 then you are entitled to claim benefits for whatever permanent impairment you have suffered.

If, your injury happened after have not made a claim for Worker’s Compensation benefits before 19 June 2012 than, you must reach a threshold of 11 % Whole Person Impairment before you are entitled to any compensation for Permanent Impairment.

Special leave to appeal this decision to the Highest Court in Australia has been made by the employer. It remains to be seen what their decision will be.
Facts

On 17 April 2010 the injured worker suffered an injury at work when a bundle of steel fell from a forklift causing him an injury on his left foot and left ankle.

Two days later the injured worker made a Workers Compensation Claim.

As is usually the case the original Workers Compensation Claim does not specifically make a claim for any permanent impairment.

The law requires that a worker “reach maximum medical improvement” before he can be assessed and make a claim for permanent impairment benefits.

On 19 June 2012, new provisions of the Workers Compensation Scheme came into force for all “claims for compensation” made on or after 19 June 2012.

The injured worker made a claim for permanent impairment benefits after this date.

In essence, the issue was whether the original Workers Compensation Claim was enough to see his claim fall under the Pre-Workers Compensation Amendments.
Decision of the President of the Worker’s Compensation Commission

President Keating of the Worker’s Compensation Commission dismissed the workers claim stating that “claim for compensation” meant that a claim specifically for permanent impairment benefits had to be made before 19 June 2012.

As the claim for permanent impairment was made by the worker after this date and under the 11 5 Whole Person Impairment Threshold he could recover no compensation for permanent impairment. The Worker Appealed to the New South Wales Court of Appeal.
The New South Wales Court of Appeal Decision

The New South Wales Court of Appeal allowed the Appeal.

The New South Wales Court of Appeal found that if any claim for Compensation is made before 19 June 2012 than the old provisions will apply to that claim (i.e there is no threshold for obtaining Whole Person Impairment benefits) and thus the worker can claim.

The Court noted that this was the case “whether the claim specifically sought compensation” for permanent impairment benefits.
Is this the final word?

The employers Solicitors are considering whether they should appeal to the highest Court in Australia that is the High Court of Australia.

The employer has until 27 May 2013 to lodge this Appeal.

If any Appeal is lodge, the High Court of Australia must grant special leave to hear the case of the employer.

If special leave is granted, than the High Court will review the case and provide a judgement which may overturn or confirm the New South Wales Court of Appeal.

It is yet to be seen whether the employer will appeal to the High Court of Australia.
The position of WorkCover

WIRO, a sub branch of WorkCover has issued the attached fact sheet which provides what an injured worker’s rights are if they have made a claim for compensation before 19 June 2012 with respect to permanent impairment.

This document states that WorkCover is of the view that an injured worker can make a claim for permanent impairment benefits.

If you reach the threshold of 11 % Whole Person Impairment than you are entitled to further compensation for pain and suffering.

If after making this claim your condition further deteriorates, an injured worker will be able to make a further claim for permanent benefits provided that the deterioration has caused an increase in assessment of permanent impairment.
Conclusion

If you have made a claim for compensation before 19 June 2012 and have any ongoing impairment we strongly suggest that you seek legal advice as to whether you have any entitlements to permanent impairment benefits.

It is still to be seen whether the New South Wales Government will seek to change the law so that the New South Wales Court of Appeal Decision is in fact changed.

If you do wish to proceed with a claim for permanent impairment benefits we ask that you kindly contact our office and arrange an appointment in this regard.

About Beilby Poulden Costello: BPC Lawyers offers legal services such as workers compensation, motor accident compensation and claims for public liability. BPC Lawyers has its origins in a legal practice started by Barry Beilby in 1975.

May 20

Worker Receives Compensation Prior to Stabilisation of All Injuries

Scott Hall-Johnston, a partner at Beilby Poulden Costello, recently represented a woman who suffered an injury in the course of her work.

The Facts:

The plaintiff, in the course of her work, fell and suffered injury to both knees and her spine. A workers compensations claim was lodged and she was deemed to have permanent injury to her right knee and spine. The injury to her left knee, although considerable, had not stabilised and could not be assessed. The Workers Compensation Commission determined that because the injury to the left knee had not stabilised, it would be inappropriate to pay compensation until such time as it did.

The Judgment:

The NSW Court of Appeal found that there is no reason why a worker cannot be paid compensation in respect of injuries that have stabilised, and at a later time, be paid compensation for injuries which have not yet stabilised.

Effect of the Decision:

The decision has ensured that workers who suffer multiple injuries in the course of their work are entitled to claim compensation prior to the stabilisation of all injuries. This decision guarantees that workers don’t suffer an unfair delay in gaining compensation as a result of injuries suffered at work.

If you would like to discuss your rights, please contact one of the solicitors at Beilby Poulden Costello on 8280 6900.
Case Source: Worker Receives Compensation Prior to Stabilisation of All Injuries

About Beilby Poulden Costello: Beilby Poulden Costello offers legal services such as workers compensation, motor accident compensation and claims for public liability. Beilby Poulden Costello has its origins in a legal practice started by Barry Beilby in 1975.

Workers Compensation