Working from home has benefits to both employees & employers, however, it also carries additional risk.

Just because the onset of a symptom commences after an accident doesn't mean that the symptom was caused by the accident.

"Attendant care services" should be given its ordinary English meaning.

Review Panel's decision in Sam demonstrates why the Supreme Court's decision in Abawi results in problematic outcomes.

HR leaders are facing more pressure, scrutiny and increased personal exposure.

An Insurer is not bound by its Internal Review determination, particularly in the face of new information.

Recent case serves as reminder that relying on the concept of res ipsa loquitor is fraught with difficulty.

In multi-vehicle accidents, contributory negligence is assessed by comparing the relative culpability of all drivers involved in the accident. Recent case example.

This case quashed the decision which ruled that an enterprise agreement did not pass the Better Off Overall Test (BOOT).

Code of Practice aims at providing practical guidance to employers to help protect workers from workplace sexual harassment.

While psychosocial risks in a restructure can't be eliminated, they must be minimised through careful planning, communication & compliance.

In some circumstances claimant is not required to demonstrate an injury to a spinal nerve root, manifesting in radiculopathy.

In recent case the PIC Member made a preliminary finding that the matter was not suitable for assessment by the PIC.

A Notice to Produce is a tool for litigants to obtain documents.

Insurance Australia Limited t/as NRMA Insurance v Kavakci [2025] NSWPICMP 227.

The Medical Review Panel concluded the Claimant's injuries were threshold injuries.

Fair Work Commission has required Westpac to approve an employee's request to work remotely.

Employers are having to navigate the legal minefield that has been caused by their employees' conduct during work-related social functions, particularly sexual harassment.

The Supreme Court of New South Wales has ruled that a default interest rate of 3% per month, compounded monthly, constitutes an unenforceable penalty despite valid loan documentation. This landmark decision challenges traditional lending structures where borrowers receive discounted rates that revert to higher rates upon default, requiring lenders to demonstrate legitimate commercial justification for increased default interest rates.

Recent case gives example of how a head injury should be assessed via a methodical application of the Motor Accident Guidelines & the AMA 4 Guides.