Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 12 MAY 2018

Tribunal will not be drawn into making conclusions on RAA without sufficient and direct evidence in support

The employer must prove that if not for the administrative action, the employee would not have suffered the condition.

AustraliaEmployment and HR

Want and Comcare [2018] AATA 877

Key Points

  • Whether a claimed psychological condition arose as a result of reasonable administrative action (RAA) and whether condition would not have arisen in absence of RAA.
  • A lack of direct evidence on whether condition would not have arisen in absence of RAA prohibited the decision maker from applying the RAA exclusion.

Background

Mr Gary Want was a public servant who had served in the Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) for 12 years. From 2006 to September 2014, Mr Want was employed at the Department of Defence in an Executive Level 1 (EL1) position at a variety of locations.

In March 2010, Mr Want submitted a claim for "sciatica and L5/S1 disc prolapse" sustained in February 2010 when he fell off his chair at work while attempting to pick up a set of keys from the floor. Comcare accepted liability for an "aggravation of degeneration of intervertebral disc" and "aggravation of sciatic (left)".

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from