Oliver v BHP [2001] NSWCC 12
Applicant suffered compensable back injuries resulting in partial incapacity and permanent impairment, entitling him to compensation. However, the applicant failed to establish that any incident at the Mines Rescue Station on 28 October 1998 caused his psychological condition; thus, the psychological claim fails.
- Parties
- Applicant: Kim Oliver; Respondent: BHP Steel (Aus) Pty Limited
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 12 April 2001
- Procedural Posture
- Workers Compensation / Judgment
- Outcome
- Applicant partially successful
- Legal Topics
- Assessment of Compensation, Permanent Impairment, Psychological Injury, Loss of Earning Capacity
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Kim Oliver
Applicant
BHP Steel (Aus) Pty Limited
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Workers Compensation / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether applicant suffered compensable injuries to his back and psychological injury arising out of employment
- 2 Assessment of permanent impairment and entitlement to compensation for back injury
- 3 Whether psychological condition was caused by employment events
Ratio Decidendi
Applicant suffered compensable back injuries resulting in partial incapacity and permanent impairment, entitling him to compensation. However, the applicant failed to establish that any incident at the Mines Rescue Station on 28 October 1998 caused his psychological condition; thus, the psychological claim fails.
Court Disposition
Applicant partially successful
Orders
- Award under former s 11(1) at $175 per week from 14 April 1999 to 31 August 2000 and $165 per week from 1 September 2000 to date and continuing
- Finding of 20% permanent impairment of back less deductible proportion of 40% ($9,525.60) under s 66
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment