21 Dec 2000
The District Court concluded there was no error of law because the judge applied the correct statutory enquiry under section 7(1)(c) and reached a factual finding, supported by specialist evidence, that freezing workers faced a significantly greater risk; therefore the application for leave to appeal was dismissed because the decision raised no question of law.
4 Dec 2000
Expert evidence (Dr Turner and Dr Monigatti) established that the biomechanical tasks of meat inspectors do not create a significantly greater risk of lateral epicondylitis than for persons not performing those tasks; therefore s7(1)(c) is not satisfied and the claim for cover fails; allegation of bias was rejected as unfounded and the rehearing jurisdiction removes that as a viable ground of appeal.
21 Jul 2000
On the balance of probabilities the appellant discharged the onus to satisfy section 7(1)(a),(b) and (c): medical and workplace evidence (notably reports of Professors Glass and Burry) established that the pretrim/trim work caused a right shoulder impingement (tendinitis) and that the injury is separate from the prior left arm injury; accordingly the respondent's denial of cover was revoked.