14 Dec 2015
The legal question whether 'engage in employment' in s103(2) requires ability to perform all pre-injury tasks is a question of law warranting leave to appeal to the High Court; it is arguable that vocational rehabilitation which increases the tasks a claimant can perform may be within s85 and that the statutory test in s103 requires authoritative interpretation.
31 Jul 2015
The appellant failed to prove she was incapacitated by her covered injury at the time she ceased employment in April 2011 as required by s103(2); contemporaneous medical evidence and credible contemporaneous reasons for resignation were absent and the resignation was attributable to relocation rather than established incapacity, therefore entitlement to weekly compensation was not established.
7 Nov 2012
The Corporation's s103 determination was invalid because it failed to investigate the appellant's actual pre-accident employment and failed to provide the assessor with the full relevant medical evidence, producing a materially flawed medical assessment; accordingly the review decision and the Corporation's determination were set aside and the matter remitted to the Corporation to re‑inquire and consider restoration of entitlements.
20 May 2011
The application for special leave was refused because the core issues were factual (no reliable evidence applicant suffered the alleged spinal/hand/wrist injuries in 1985 and she returned to pre-injury employment), s103 requires covered injury to establish incapacity, and the applicant failed to identify any question of law capable of bona fide serious argument or having a reasonable prospect of success under s162.