The Tribunal noted that the burden lay with the applicant to be ready to bring the matters forward in a timely manner.

The Court found that the nexus between the employment and the injury had been broken and found in favour of Telstra.

The Tribunal considered if he was entitled to ongoing compensation for incapacity to work and medical treatment expenses.

There is no prejudice in extending a limitation period to join a defendant when the person is already a cross-defendant.

This is the first of a three-part series which looks at recent demands for law firms to innovate to stay competitive.

To be entitled to compensation, a worker must prove that work is not just the scene of the pain, it must be a cause of it.

The Tribunal was satisfied that the holistic approach adopted by Dr Syme was focused on supporting the patient in life.

Article looks at difficulties an applicant may face when bringing a claim for hearing loss after they have ceased employment.

This case highlights difficulties to determine if her employment continues to contribute to her psychological condition.

Evidence must establish that the misrepresentation was wilfully false and made without any belief that it was true.

The judge accepted that adequate reasons were not provided so the matter was remitted to the Tribunal for reconsideration.

It was appropriate that some reasoning is given when the competing evidence goes to the core of the decision reached.

The Tribunal found credibility issues with the plaintiff's evidence, and found in favour of the employer.

This article briefly discusses some of the recent amendments to the SRC Act 1988, including Instruments and Declarations.

A summons to obtain documents must have some apparent or adjectival relevance to the issues in the principal proceeding.

The Tribunal did not accept that bullying experienced by the officer had significantly contributed to the aggravation.

The Tribunal found there was insufficient evidence to relate the surgery to her accepted psychological condition.

There was a sufficient connection to actual events in the workplace, for the employee to be entitled to compensation.

The Court had no difficulty in finding that the settlement was reasonable and so the insurer was liable to reimburse it.

For a pre-existing medical condition to be compensable, there must be an incident which caused a change to that condition.