Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 29 OCTOBER 2026

Consequential Injury Claims: Why Contemporaneous Records Matter

A recent Personal Injury Commission decision examines the evidentiary requirements for establishing consequential injuries in workers compensation claims, highlighting how inconsistent reporting and contemporaneous medical records can undermine a worker's case for causal connection between accepted and alleged injuries.

AustraliaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration

Consequential injuries are common in workers compensation claims. For a worker to establish they have a consequential injury they need to show it was causally related to and results from the accepted physical injuries.

Workers are not required to prove the consequential injury is an injury within the meaning of section 4(a) of the Workers Compensation Act 1987 (1987 Act) or prove that employment was a substantial contributing factor to the injury under section 9A of the 1987 Act.

This a lower bar then establishing the primary injury. However, evidence is still required to establish the causal connection between the accepted injury and the alleged consequential injury.

The recent decision in Likow v Qantas Ground Services Pty Ltd [2026] NSWPIC 417 explored an alleged consequential injury and reinforced the importance of contemporaneous records and consistency in reporting the emergence of symptoms in determining causation.

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.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

See more popular content from