Robbie v Strasburger Enterprises Pty Ltd t/as Quix Food Stores & Ors [2017] NSWSC 363

Robbie v Strasburger Enterprises Pty Ltd t/as Quix Food Stores & Ors [2017] NSWSC 363

Paragraph 4.37 of the NSW Workers Compensation Guidelines requires the DRE/ADL value to be combined with a single, aggregated 'appropriate additional amount' from Table 4.2 using the Combined Values Chart. Individual surgical modifiers in Table 4.2 do not constitute separate 'impairments' for the purpose of multiple, successive combinations. The third defendant did not err in concluding that no demonstrable error justified appeal under s 327(3)(d) of the WIM Act; the text of the Guidelines supported the method applied by the Approved Medical Specialist.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 April 2017
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment
Outcome
Plaintiff's summons dismissed
Legal Topics
['judicial Review' 'statutory Interpretation' 'workers Compensation Assessment' 'medical Assessment Certificate' 'whole Person Impairment']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment

  1. 1 ['Proper method of calculating Whole Person Impairment (WPI) for lumbar spine injury with persisting radiculopathy after multiple surgeries' 'Interpretation of paragraph 4.37 and Table 4.2 of the NSW Workers Compensation Guidelines in conjunction with AMA5 Combined Values Chart' 'Whether demonstrable error existed in Medical Assessment Certificate justifying appeal under s 327 of the Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998 (NSW)']

Ratio Decidendi

Paragraph 4.37 of the NSW Workers Compensation Guidelines requires the DRE/ADL value to be combined with a single, aggregated 'appropriate additional amount' from Table 4.2 using the Combined Values Chart. Individual surgical modifiers in Table 4.2 do not constitute separate 'impairments' for the purpose of multiple, successive combinations. The third defendant did not err in concluding that no demonstrable error justified appeal under s 327(3)(d) of the WIM Act; the text of the Guidelines supported the method applied by the Approved Medical Specialist.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's summons dismissed

Orders

  • ["Dismiss the plaintiff's summons." "The plaintiff is to pay the first defendant's costs."]