The recent decision of Dries v CGA Glass & Aluminium Pty
Ltd [2019] NSWWCC 329 (Dries) in the Workers
Compensation Commission has seen a worker awarded a new motor
vehicle as a medical expense.
Following a multilevel spinal fusion the worker had significant
mobility restrictions and used mobility aids which had been paid
for by the insurer. The aids included a wheelchair, arm-rest
walker, walking sticks and a mobility scooter. He claimed he was
required to have at least two of these four options available to
him at all times to deal with changing terrain, and that they did
not fit in his Mazda 3.
The worker claimed the cost of a new Hyundai Imax (including a
ramp fit out, less the trade in value of his old car) under section
60 of the Workers Compensation Act 1987 (1987
Act), arguing the new vehicle was a 'curative
apparatus' within the meaning of sections 59 and 60 of the 1987
Act.
