Legal Bulletin No. 251
This bulletin was issued on 13 March 2026
Issued 13 March 2026
Welcome to the two hundred and fifty-first edition of the Personal Injury Commission’s Legal Bulletin. Please see here for details about the legal citations used for the Commission’s decisions. The decisions listed below are now available on AustLII and will be available shortly, on Jade and Lexis Nexis. Any legislative updates are provided at the base of the Bulletin.
Supreme Court Decision
Bath v Allianz Australia Insurance Limited [2026] NSWSC 165
Administrative law; judicial review; decision of review panel; motor vehicle accident; where plaintiff injured from fall on Sydney Light Rail; whether lack of contemporaneous evidence treated as decisive or determinative of causation; whether lawful reasons not given; whether jurisdictional error; Held – set aside the second defendant’s decision made on 4 July 2025; remit the matter to the President of the Personal Injury Commission of New South Wales for referral to a differently constituted review panel under section 7.26 of the Motor Accident Injuries Act 2017 (NSW) for redetermination according to law; as to costs, direct that any submissions by the plaintiff as to costs, not exceeding 3 pages, be filed and served by 4:00pm on 16 March 2026; direct that any submissions by the first defendant as to costs, not exceeding 3 pages, be filed and served by 4:00pm on 23 March 2026; direct that any submissions by the plaintiff in reply, not exceeding 1 page, be filed and served within 2 days of receipt of the submissions provided for in Order 3(b) above; note that the issue of costs will be determined on the papers without an oral hearing.
Decision date: 9 March 2026 | Before: Price AJA
Presidential Member Decisions
Workers compensation; alleged factual error on appeal; State of New South Wales v Culhana [2025] NSWCA 157; the onus of proof in applications pursuant to section 145(3) of the Workers Compensation Act 1987; Raniere Nominees Pty Ltd v Daley [2005] NSWCA 121; 66 NSWLR 594; consideration of CCTV footage; QBE Insurance (Australia) Ltd v Orcher [2013] NSWCA 478; Held – pursuant to rule 132 of the Personal Injury Commission Rules 2021 this decision is to be de-identified consistent with the approach taken at first instance; the Appeal is dismissed; the Certificate of Determination dated 31 July 2025 is confirmed.
Decision date: 4 March 2026 | Before: Deputy President Michael Snell
Taylor v John Thompson Racing [2026] NSWPICPD 9
Workers compensation; section 4(b)(ii) of the Workers Compensation Act 1987; time within which claim for compensation must be made; section 261 of the Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998; exception to section 261(4) of the Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998; expert report does not indicate that employment was the main contributing factor in the aggravation of a disease condition; the appeal is dismissed; the Certificate of Determination dated 21 August 2025 is confirmed.
Decision date: 5 March 2026 | Before: Acting Deputy President Geoffrey Parker SC
Motor Accidents non-Presidential Member Decisions
Allianz Australia Insurance Limited v Sokopf [2026] NSWPIC 120
Motor Accident Injuries Act 2017; insurer’s application for exemption under section 7.34(1)(b); whether the claim for common law damages involves complex issues relating to liability; contributory negligence; fault; causation; where the motor accident occurred on the employer’s premises; where the employer was the CTP insured of the vehicle; whether the claimant was the “driver” of the insured vehicle at the relevant time; where there is an allegation by the claimant of a failure to maintain the insured vehicle and to ensure that it was free from defects; insurer denied liability; where a work injuries damages claim is foreshadowed which would involve a claim against a non-CTP party; Held – claim is not suitable for assessment by the Personal Injury Commission; recommendation made that the claim be exempted subsequently approved by Division Head as the President’s delegate.
Decision date: 22 January 2026| Member: Maurice Castagnet
Russell v Allianz Australia Insurance Limited [2026] NSWPIC 129
Motor Accident Injuries Act 2017 (2017 Act); Motor Accidents Compensation Act 1999 (1999 Act); interlocutory determination; fare-paying passenger injured on a scheduled metropolitan bus service operated by a private company under contract with Transport for NSW; claimant sustained threshold injuries and sought damages; insurer opposed liability on two grounds; accident was not a “public transport accident” within the meaning of section 121(3) of the Transport Administration Act 1988 (NSW) (TA Act); section 4.4 of the 2017 Act barred recovery for threshold injuries; the Personal Injury Commission held the accident occurred in the course of public transport as defined by section 121(3) (TA Act), noting that statutory language focused on the character of the service rather than the identity of the operator; McTye v Ching Yu Chang by his tutor Leo Alexander Birch applied; Chapter 5 of the 1999 Act is engaged via section 121 of the TA Act; operates as a complete and exclusive damages regime; threshold injury restrictions in Part 4 of the 2017 Act have no application to such claims; Held – accident was a public transport accident; section 4.4 of the 2017 Act does not apply; claim may proceed under Chapter 5 of the 1999 Act.
Decision date: 29 January 2026| Member: Bridie Nolan
AAI Limited t/as GIO v Bullen [2026] NSWPIC 122
Motor Accident Injuries Act 2017; discretionary exemption application by insurer and claimant consented; Held – claim not suitable for assessment at the Personal Injury Commission pursuant to section 7.34 (1)(b); basis not suitable; claim involves complex liability, fault and causation, factual issues two collisions, multiple parties and claims to be heard together; claimant’s husband’s common law claim; other related claims and compensation to relatives claim have been exempted; rule 99(3)(a) and (b) of the Personal Injury Commission Rules 2021; other factors include length of hearing, number of witnesses to be called and subpoena likely, one forum for all matters; recommendation subsequently approved by the Division Head, as the President’s delegate.
Decision date: 6 February 2026| Member: Shana Radnan
Insurance Australia Limited t/as NRMA Insurance v Ho [2026] NSWPIC 108
Motor Accident Injuries Act 2017; settlement approval; pedestrian; injuries; right subtalar fracture requiring fusion in the future; psychological injuries; post-traumatic stress disorder; Held – proposed settlement in the sum of $520,000 approved; non-economic loss $330,000; past economic loss $40,000; buffer for future economic loss $150,000; settlement approved; complies with clause 7.37 of the Motor Accident Injuries Guidelines.
Decision date: 18 February 2026| Member: Shana Radnan
AAI Limited t/as Suncorp Insurance v Zhang [2026] NSWPIC 125
Motor Accident Injuries Act 2017; settlement approval; claimant was driving his motor vehicle through an intersection when his vehicle was impacted by the driver of the insured motor vehicle; the claimant sustained soft tissue injuries to the cervical spine, right shoulder and left shoulder, and also was certified by the medical service as suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder and persistent depressive disorder; working reduced hours on light duties; insurer admitted liability; no entitlement to non-economic loss; claim for past and future economic loss plus loss of superannuation; total amount proposed after deduction of workers compensation pay back is $230,176.05 less payback to Centrelink which has yet to be ascertained; Held – proposed settlement is just, fair and reasonable; proposed settlement is approved under section 6.23 (2)(b).
Decision date: 25 February 2026| Member: David Ford
Butler v AAI Limited t/as GIO [2026] NSWPIC 132
Motor Accident Injuries Act 2017; claim for statutory benefits under Part 3; insurer alleges contributory negligence at 80% and claimant mostly at fault; claimant riding motorbike when lost control after riding through or over a “pothole”; assessment based on audio-visual evidence of claimant and documentary material; no expert evidence; Held – state of road considered; claimant travelling at 20 kms under the speed limit; claimant had seen gesture from rider ahead but had no time to take action; claimant did not depart from the requisite standard of care and was not wholly or mostly at fault for the accident; GIO v Evic approach considered; Manley v Alexander, and Mamo v Surace applied as to reasonableness not perfection required.
Decision date: 2 March 2026| Member: Belinda Cassidy
Patel v Allianz Australia Insurance Limited [2026] NSWPIC 133
Motor Accident Injuries Act 2017; damages assessment; vehicle struck by heavy vehicle; liability admitted with no allegation of contributory negligence; significant reliability and credit issues; overpayment of statutory benefits; claimant continued working until lumbar spinal surgery whilst overseas; no investigation of post-accident earning capacity; ongoing impairment consequent on lumbar spinal injury; multiple post-accident overseas trips; claimant received benefits whilst overseas; Held – reduction in earning capacity; assessment of non-economic loss and provision of buffer where earning capacity remains uncertain; conflicting medical material; damages assessed at $1,390,000 which includes past and future economic loss together with non-economic loss.
Decision date: 2 March 2026 | Member: Hugh Macken
AAI Limited t/as AAMI v DTM [2026] NSWPIC 142
Motor Accident Injuries Act 2017; settlement approval under section 6.23(2)(b); right heel, right ankle, back and left shoulder injuries; claimant returned to pre-accident employment working reduced hours; weekly payments of statutory benefits paid by insurer and to be deducted from settlement; proposed settlement of $710,000 includes allowances for non-economic loss, past economic loss and future economic loss; Held – proposed settlement approved.
Decision date: 4 March 2026| Senior Member: Brett Williams
Mehr v AAI Limited t/as GIO [2026] NSWPIC 143
Motor Accident Injuries Act 2017; miscellaneous claims assessment; late claim for statutory benefits; claimant lodged application for personal injury benefits approximately four months after motor accident; dispute concerning entitlement to weekly statutory benefits for the period prior to lodgement; operation of section 6.13(2) which imposes a mandatory prohibition on payment of weekly statutory benefits for any period before the claim is made where the claim is lodged outside 28 days; insurer produced payment schedules confirming weekly benefits paid from date of claim until cessation at 52 weeks under section 3.28 following fault determination; Held – regardless of explanation for delay, the Personal Injury Commission has no power to order payment of weekly statutory benefits for any period prior to the making of the claim; claimant not entitled to weekly benefits from 13 December 2023 to 7 April 2024.
Decision date: 4 March 2026| Member: Bridie Nolan
Holmes v Insurance Australia Limited t/as NRMA Insurance [2026] NSWPIC 146
Motor Accident Injuries Act 2017; common law damages claim; claimant suffered injuries when his vehicle was hit from behind by the insured vehicle whilst the claimant was waiting to turn right; claimant says he suffers short-term memory loss, difficulty with concentration, post-traumatic stress disorder, anxiety and depression and recurrent nightmares associated with nose bleeds; insurer wholly admitted liability for the claim; claimant self-represented; multi-comorbidities; no entitlement to any non-economic loss; claim restricted to past and future economic loss, future loss of earning capacity; parties agree to assessment on the papers; no evidence that claimant lacks capacity; Held – award of $100,000 for past economic loss; no award for future economic loss as not satisfied that claimant’s most likely future circumstances, but for the accident, any different to what they are.
Decision date: 5 March 2026| Member: Gary Victor Patterson
Workers Compensation non-Presidential Member Decisions
Hoang v Arete Health Care (Lansdowne) Pty Ltd & Ors [2026] NSWPIC 115
Workers Compensation Act 1987; Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998; death claim; determination of dependency; apportionment; payment of death benefit and interest; TNT Group 4 Pty Limited v Halioris, Kaur v Thales Underwater Systems Pty Ltd, and Wratten v Kirkpatrick & Ors considered and applied; Held – death benefit and agreed interest apportioned and orders for payment made.
Decision date: 9 March 2026| Principal Member: Glenn Capel
Farah v Dasco Construction Pty Ltd (Deregistered) [2026] NSWPIC 126
Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998; applicant seeking to bring claim for further weekly compensation and lump sum compensation in respect of an injury; applicant had previously been paid all entitlements to workers compensation benefits on the basis that he had suffered an injury while employed by a different entity to the present respondent; applicant now alleged that the respondent in the present proceedings was the direct employer at the date of accident; Held – applicant failed to discharge his onus of proof to establish that he was a worker employed by the respondent; award for the respondent.
Decision date: 25 February 2026| Member: Michael Moore
Raskov v Carbridge Pty Ltd [2026] NSWPIC 127
Workers Compensation Act 1987; weekly compensation; whether effects of accepted aggravations have passed; whether secondary psychological injury suffered; extent of ongoing incapacity; applicant suffered accepted neck and back injuries in the course of her employment with the respondent, and was certified unfit for work, at various times on a total and partial basis; respondent issued a work capacity decision reducing the applicant’s weekly compensation, and a later section 78 notice alleging the effects of her injuries had passed; applicant claimed a secondary psychological condition which was disputed by the respondent; Held – effects of the applicant’s injuries are ongoing; applicant suffered a secondary psychological injury; no inference should be drawn by reason of the respondent offering no evidence on this aspect of the claim; the applicant has discharged her onus of proof; section 32A of the Act; work capacity decision is set aside; respondent to pay applicant weekly compensation as claimed.
Decision date: 25 February 2026| Member: Cameron Burge
Brennan v State of New South Wales (Justice and Forensic Mental Health Network) [2026] NSWPIC 130
Workers Compensation Act 1987; medical expenses, weekly compensation; claim for total knee replacement applicant funded privately; whether need for surgery arose as a result of injury; applicant aggravated her knee falling down some stairs; had knee replacement in opposite knee unrelated to any injury; background of degenerative change in the knee; change in the left knee came on quicker than expected; Held – need for surgery arose as a result of injury; respondent to pay applicant’s medical expenses and weekly compensation during period of recovery.
Decision date: 27 February 2026| Member: Parnel McAdam
Tahir v Eastern Creek Karts Pty Ltd [2026] NSWPIC 134
Workers Compensation Act 1987; claim for the cost of proposed surgery to the right knee, past physiotherapy treatment, and weekly payments of compensation for one week; whether the worker continues to suffer the effects of the work injury; whether an order for payment of the proposed surgery can be made pursuant to section 60 (5) having regard to the provisions of section 59A; Flying Solo Properties P/L v Collett considered; Held – worker continues to suffer the effects of the injury sustained to the right knee; the proposed surgery is reasonably necessary as a result of the work injury, but no order made pursuant to section 60(5) having regard to the provisions of section 59A; no award for the payment of past physiotherapy expenses having regard to the provisions of section 59A; award of weekly compensation for one week.
Decision date: 2 March 2026| Member: John Isaksen
Sanders v Rivalea Australia Pty Ltd [2026] NSWPIC 135
Workers Compensation Act 1987; injury; whether worker suffered lumbar spine injury in addition to thoracic spine injury in fall at work; medical records reveal complaint of pain in body system in dispute shortly after accident, contrary to the history provided to many medical experts retained in matter; Castro v State Transit Authority (NSW) [2000] NSWCC12 applied; Kooragang Cement Pty Ltd v Bates (1994) 35NSWLR452 considered; Held – applicant suffered an injury to his lumbar spine in the fall at issue; matter remitted to the President for referral to a Medical Assessor for determination of permanent impairment to the thoracic and lumbar spines.
Decision date: 2 March 2026| Member: Cameron Burge
Campbell v Ready Workforce (a Division of Chandler Macleod) Pty Ltd [2026] NSWPIC 137
Workers Compensation Act 1987; injury to lumbar spine not disputed; entitlement to continuation of weekly benefits under section 38(2) following a work capacity decision disputed; “current work capacity” and “no current work capacity” as defined in clause 9 of Schedule 3 considered; “suitable employment” as defined in section 32A considered; the application of section 38(2) and the meaning of current work capacity “likely to continue indefinitely”; expert opinions; Hancock v East Coast Timbers Products Pty Ltd, Paric v John Holland (Constructions) Pty Ltd, Makita (Australia) Pty Ltd v Sprowles Wollongong Nursing Home Pty Ltd v Dewar, Roberts v University of Sydney, Sinclair v Linfox Armaguard Pty Ltd, ACW v ACX, and Tubemakers of Australia Ltd v Fernandez considered and applied; Held – applicant is currently not capable of suitable employment within the meaning of section 32A; applicant has had no current work capacity; applicant is and is likely to continue indefinitely to have no current work capacity; respondent is to pay the applicant weekly compensation in respect of the injury sustained under sections 38(2) and 38(6) until such payment is suspended, varied or terminated under the provisions of the Act.
Decision date: 3 March 2026| Member: Anthony Scarcella
Therikildsen v Deemann Pty Ltd [2026] NSWPIC 138
Workers Compensation Act 1987; claim for payment of weekly compensation and medical expenses pursuant to section 60; whether the applicant was a worker or deemed worker at the date of injury disputed; Held – applicant has failed his onus to establish he was a worker or deemed worker at the date of injury; there is an award entered for the respondent.
Decision date: 3 March 2026| Member: Fiona Seaton
Jandric v State of New South Wales (Sydney Local Health District) [2026] NSWPIC 144
Workers Compensation Act 1987; claim for weekly benefits pursuant to section 38 following accepted injury to the lumbar spine; Held – injury had not resolved and applicant had no current work capacity from 21 June 2025 to date and continuing.
Decision date: 4 March 2026| Member: Carolyn Rimmer
Singh v Sydney Trains [2026] NSWPIC 147
Workers Compensation Act 1987; proposed surgery; whether applicant suffered an injury in the nature of an aggravation of a disease, to which employment was the main contributing factor; claim for treatment of varicose veins; worker had congenital varicose veins; worked for long hours standing; competing medical opinions; respondent’s independent medical expert opinion undermined by phrasing of questions asked; Held – worker suffered an injury to which employment was the main contributing factor; surgery reasonably necessary as a result of injury.
Decision date: 5 March 2026| Member: Parnel McAdam
Motor Accidents Medical Review Panel Decisions
DMM v Insurance Australia Limited t/as NRMA Insurance [2026] NSWPICMP 86
Motor Accident Injuries Act 2017; review of medical assessment; whole person impairment (WPI); assessment of treatment and care Cannabis oil; prior psychiatric symptoms of depression and anxiety; issues arising from or related to gender dysmorphia; vehicle T-bone; fractured right hip, fractured right pelvis; requirement for surgical procedures; vulnerable individual prior to the motor accident; application of psychiatric impairment rating scale to current impairment and pre-existing impairment; recommendations not supportive of the use of medical cannabis for psychiatric conditions; Held – 12% WPI.
Decision date: 5 February 2026| Panel Members: Member Hugh Macken, Dr Wayne Mason, and Dr Alan Doris| Injury module: Mental and Behaviour; Treatment Type: Psychiatric Treatment
Carey v Allianz Australia Insurance Limited [2026] NSWPICMP 143
Motor Accident Injuries Act 2017; claimant was injured in a motor vehicle accident; medical dispute arose as to the total whole person impairment (WPI); further dispute arose as to treatment and care; Medical Assessor (MA) determined the claimant’s WPI at 0%; further determined that the proposed treatment and care being osteopathic treatment sessions, further MRI, and further consultation related to the injuries caused by the accident but was not reasonable and necessary in the circumstances; further determined that the provision of a further pair of running shoes related to the injuries caused by the accident and was reasonable and necessary in the circumstances; claimant sought a review of the Medical Assessment under section 7.26; Held – Review Panel conducted a medical examination; MA determination was revoked; Review Panel determined that the injuries caused by the accident gave rise to a WPI of 6%; as to the treatment and care dispute, the Review Panel affirmed the decision of the original MA.
Decision date: 25 February 2026| Panel Members: Member Terence Stern OAM, Dr David McGrath, and Dr Shane Moloney| Injury module: Spine, Upper Limb, and Lower Limb
Allianz Australia Insurance Limited v El Asrag [2026] NSWPICMP 154
Motor Accident Injuries Act 2017; urinary tract; stress incontinence whole person impairment; causation; claimant suffered injury in a motor vehicle accident; Medical Assessor (MA) certified 10% whole person impairment (WPI) due to impairment of the lower urinary tract including bladder; insurer sought review; Held – pre and post urodynamic studies essentially the same; pre-existing condition of mixed urge and stress incontinence; claimant consulted a GP when no complaint made and when Oxybutynin previously prescribed for stress or urge incontinence ceased; no complaint until 30 October 2019; Briggs v IAG Limited Trading as NRMA Insurance applied; accident did not cause urinary tract including bladder condition injury; original MA certificate revoked.
Decision date: 2 March 2026 | Panel Members: Senior Member Susan McTegg, Dr John Schmidt, and Dr Norman Chan | Injury module: Urinary Tract and Reproductive Systems
Khan v QBE Insurance (Australia) Limited [2026] NSWPICMP 155
Motor Accident Injuries Act 2017; claimant driver in the lead car in a five car buildup when a car struck him from behind; threshold injury dispute; whether left knee medial meniscal tear is causally related to the motor accident; original Medical Assessor (MA) stated mechanism of accident did not involve any twisting of the left knee and therefore no meniscal tear could have occurred; dispute resolution narrowed issues to be decided by Review Panel; Held – Review Panel accepted, on balance, mechanism of motor accident and injuries to the claimant’s left leg satisfied medial meniscal tear causally related to motor accident; meniscal tear determined to be not a threshold injury; original medical assessment revoked.
Decision date: 2 March 2026 | Panel Members: Member Jeremy Lum, Dr Margaret Gibson, and Dr Christopher Oates| Injury module: Spine, Upper Limb, and Lower Limb
Jackwitz v QBE Insurance (Australia) Limited [2026] NSWPICMP 156
Motor Accident Injuries Act 2017; review of Medical Assessment Certificate (MAC) under section 7.26; dispute regarding degree of permanent impairment resulting from physical injuries; lumbar spine, right foot and right ankle injuries said to be caused by the accident; Medical Assessor (MA) certified that injuries caused by accident resulted in permanent impairment of 9%, being not greater than 10%; no allegation of pre-existing injuries or subsequent impairment; claimant examined; parties advised of additional diagnosis by MA; Mandoukos v Allianz Australia Insurance Limited considered and applied; Held – Review Panel satisfied claimant’s injuries of lumbar spine, right foot and right ankle were caused by the accident; Review Panel assessed a degree of permanent impairment resulting from those injuries to be 9%, which is not greater than 10%; Review Panel unable to consider additional diagnosis as part of its review; MAC confirmed.
Decision date: 2 March 2026| Panel Members: Member Bianca Montgomery-Hribar, Dr David Gorman, and Dr Margaret Gibson| Injury module: Spine, Lower Limb, and Skin
Stewart v QBE Insurance (Australia) Limited [2026] NSWPICMP 157
Motor Accident Injuries Act 2017; review of medical assessment; whole person impairment (WPI); re-examination required; pre-existing bipolar disorder in remission; pre-existing intestinal disorder; claimant in pursuit of individual when struck by car; physical injuries, including tibial fracture; development of post-traumatic stress disorder; persistent pain and restricted mobility; pre-existing psychological condition; criteria satisfied for post-traumatic stress disorder; diagnosis of borderline personality disorder not confirmed; no subsequent impairment; Held – 6% WPI.
Decision date: 2 March 2026 | Panel Members: Member Hugh Macken, Dr John Baker, and Dr Matthew Jones| Injury module: Mental and Behavioural
AAI Limited t/as GIO v EOO [2026] NSWPICMP 158
Motor Accident Injuries Act 2017; review of single medical assessment by review panel; whether the claimant suffered a psychological injury caused by the motor accident that is not a threshold injury for the purposes of the Act; complicated pre-existing psychological history; multiple motor vehicle accidents other than subject accident; evidence and presentation did not reveal any new psychological injury suffered by the claimant or an aggravation of the pre-existing personality disorder; Held – motor vehicle accident did not cause a psychological injury; determination as to whether injury is a threshold injury is not required; certificate revoked.
Decision date: 3 March 2026| Panel Members: Member Elizabeth Medland, Dr Surabhi Verma, and Dr Wayne Mason | Injury module: Mental and Behavioural
Insurance Australia Limited t/as NRMA Insurance v Jovicic [2026] NSWPICMP 159
Motor Accident Injuries Act 2017; review of medical assessment of single Medical Assessor (MA); whether the claimant suffered a psychological injury caused by the motor accident which is greater than 10% whole person impairment (WPI); question as to credibility raised by insurer’s qualified psychiatrist; claimant submits error in the class of impairment under the psychiatric impairment rating scale for various categories; Held – accept claimant has suffered a major depressive disorder due to the motor accident; WPI assessed at 7%; Review Panel revoked original certificate due to difference in WPI.
Decision date: 3 March 2026| Panel Members: Member Elizabeth Medland, Dr Matthew Jones, and Dr John Baker | Injury module: Treatment Type: Surgery
Al Salih v Allianz Australia Insurance Limited [2026] NSWPICMP 165
Motor Accident Injuries Act 2017; threshold injury disputes; claimant was driving on his way home; as his vehicle was traversing a roundabout, it was hit on the passenger side by the vehicle at fault; his passenger was significantly injured; claimant was driven home by a friend; claimant saw his GP the following day with right-sided neck pain radiating to his shoulder and upper back; claimant has not returned to work since the accident; claimant received physiotherapy and was commenced on prescription analgesics; claimant has sustained a knee injury requiring surgery; Medical Assessor (MA) certified that accident caused soft tissue threshold injury to head, cervical spine, thoracic spine and lumbar spine; MA also certified that injuries to right shoulder, right arm and right knee not caused by motor accident; claimant’s review application allowed by President’s delegate on the basis that unspecified inconsistencies were not brought to the claimant’s attention; claimant re-examined by MA with whose findings of another MA concurred; Review Panel viewed video footage of aftermath of accident; Held – certificates confirmed.
Decision date: 4 March 2026| Panel Members: Member Gary Victor Patterson, Dr David Gorman, and Dr Christopher Oates| Injury module: Brain injury, Spine, Upper Limb, and Lower Limb
Allianz Australia Insurance Limited v Zhang [2026] NSWPICMP 166
Motor Accident Injuries Act 2017; review of medical assessment; psychiatric injury; persistent depressive disorder with anxious distress; anxiety surrounding hearing loss and vertigo; normal radiological brain scans; impairment due to somatoform disorders or pain; impairment emanated from concerns about dizziness; causation of post-accident migraines, dizziness, hearing loss and vertigo; not established that the accident was the cause of these conditions; whole person impairment assessed; Held – claimant did not sustain psychiatric injury as a consequence of the motor vehicle accident; degree of permanent impairment is 0%.
Decision date: 4 March 2026 | Panel Members: Member Hugh Macken, Dr Wayne Mason, and Dr Gerald Chew| Injury module: Mental and Behavioural
Workers Compensation Medical Appeal Panel Decisions
Toll Transport Pty Ltd t/as Toll Global Logistics v Bullock [2026] NSWPICMP 144
Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998; appeal against section 323 deduction where appellant underwent laminectomy and subsequent adjacent disc fusion in 1995; appellant had 7 years off and then obtained employment as long haul truck driver in 2003; in 2021 appellant developed symptoms in his back and came to a further fusion procedure in 2022, fusing the adjacent segment from the 1995 surgery; whether one-tenth deduction pursuant to section 323(2) erroneous; whether section 323 deduction for respiratory system assessment ought to have been made; Held – statutory assumption not available as adequate medical evidence available and at odds with 10% whole person impairment (WPI); Medical Assessor (MA) reasons inadequate; Donhad Pty Ltd v Asbury considered; evidence of long asymptomatic employment with appellant employer relevant to assessment of contribution; Medical Assessment Certificate (MAC) revoked and 25% deduction substituted; MA also failed to give adequate reasons re respiratory system assessment in the face of both specialists agreeing that deduction appropriate; MAC revoked; 40% deduction made.
Decision date: 25 February 2026 | Panel Members: Member John Wynyard, Dr David Croker, and Dr Drew Dixon | Injury module: Lumbar Spine, Respiratory System, and Scarring (TEMSKI)
Summerell v Cabneemm Pty Ltd [2026] NSWPICMP 145
Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998; appellant submits that the Medical Assessor (MA) erred in respect of the deduction he made pursuant to section 323; Held – Appeal Panel agreed MA’s deduction was excessive in part due to a flawed history; Medical Assessment Certificate revoked.
Decision date: 26 February 2026 | Panel Members: Member Deborah Moore, Dr Alan Home, and Dr Drew Dixon| Injury module: Right Lower Extremity, and Left Lower Extremity
Brien v State of New South Wales South Western Sydney Local Health District [2026] NSWPICMP 146
Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998; whether the Medical Assessor’s (MA) ratings of the appellant’s impairment in travel, and concentration, persistence and pace, and employability accorded with the history the MA obtained and the other evidence before the MA; Held – Appeal Panel found that the MA ratings of the appellant’s impairment in concentration, persistence and pace accorded with the history the MA obtained and the other evidence before the MA but his ratings of the appellant’s impairment in travel and employability did not; Medical Assessment Certificate revoked.
Decision date: 26 February 2026| Panel Members: Member Marshal Douglas, Dr Graham Blom, Professor Nicholas Glozier| Injury module: Psychological/Psychiatric
Smith v State of New South Wales (Fire & Rescue NSW) [2026] NSWPICMP 147
Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998; appellant submits that the Medical Assessor erred with respect his whole person impairment (WPI) assessments of two of the categories of the psychiatric impairment rating scale, namely travel, and concentration, persistence and pace; Held – Appeal Panel found no errors; assessments were consistent with the evidence; Medical Assessment Certificate confirmed.
Decision date: 26 February 2026| Panel Members: Member Deborah Moore, Professor Nicholas Glozier, Dr Douglas Andrews| Injury module: Psychological/Psychiatric
Sarkis v Willis Australia Group Services Pty Ltd [2026] NSWPICMP 150
Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998; section 327(3); demonstrable error, incorrect criteria; Jenkins v Ambulance Service of New South Wales, Ferguson v State of New South Wales, and State of NSW (NSW Police Force) v Pirie considered and applied; Held – Medical Assessment Certificate (MAC) revoked; new MAC issued.
Decision date: 27 February 2026 | Panel Members: Member John Turner, Dr Graham Blom, and Dr Douglas Andrews| Injury module: Psychological/Psychiatric
Catholic Diocese of Parramatta Services Ltd v Walker [2026] NSWPICMP 151
Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998; psychological injury; lump sum claim; appellant employer alleged inadequate path of reasoning for certification of the worker having reached Maximum Medical Improvement assessment on the basis of incorrect criteria; Held – Appeal Panel considered error made and a re-examination was considered necessary; Medical Assessment Certificate revoked.
Decision date: 27 February 2026| Panel Members: Member Jane Peacock, Dr Michael Hong, and Dr John Lam Po Tang | Injury module: Psychological/Psychiatric
Harvey v Camden Golf Club [2026] NSWPICMP 152
Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998; appeal by applicant following assessment of psychiatric injury on the basis that the decision contained a demonstrable error and was made on the basis of incorrect criteria; first ground of appeal in respect of the psychiatric impairment rating scale (PIRS) of self-care and personal hygiene, social and recreational activities, travel, social functioning and concentration persistence and pace; second ground of appeal in respect of failure to give adequate reasons; Appeal Panel found no error in assessment of PIRS of self-care and personal hygiene, social and recreational activities, travel, social functioning; error identified in assessment of concentration persistence and pace; Medical Assessor (MA) gave adequate reasons in all PIRS categories except in concentration persistence and pace; findings on review of concentration persistence and pace resulted in same assessment as made by MA; Held – Medical Assessment Certificate confirmed.
Decision date: 27 February 2026| Panel Members: Member Carolyn Rimmer, Dr Douglas Andrews, and Dr Michael Hong | Injury module: Psychological/Psychiatric
Roache v Proveda Ltd [2026] NSWPICMP 153
Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998; appeal from Medical Assessment Certificate (MAC); adequacy of reasons; consideration of competing evidence; whether classification by Medical Assessor glaringly improbable; Wingfoot Australia Partners Pty Ltd v Kocak, Glenn William Parker v Select Civil Pty Ltd, Ferguson v State of New South Wales, and Ballas v Department of Education considered and applied; Held – categorisation of behaviour within correct psychiatric impairment rating scale categories; MAC revoked; new MAC issued.
Decision date: 1 March 2026 | Panel Members: Member Mitchell Strachan, Professor Nicholas Glozier, Dr Graham Blom | Injury module: Psychological/Psychiatric
Highland Pine Products Pty Ltd v Mitchell [2026] NSWPICMP 161
Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998; appellant submits that the Medical Assessor erred with respect his whole person impairment assessments of three of the categories of the psychiatric impairment rating scale, namely social functioning, concentration, persistence and pace, and employability; Held – Appeal Panel found error in two categories; no error in concentration, persistence and pace; Medical Assessment Certificate revoked.
Decision date: 3 March 2026 | Panel Members: Member Deborah Moore, Dr John Baker, and Dr Douglas Andrews | Injury module: Psychological/Psychiatric
Woolworths Group Ltd v Angelkoski [2026] NSWPICMP 162
Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998; appeal by employer from 26% whole person impairment (WPI) assessment for worker who had undergone 2 lumbar surgeries in 2015 and 2022; whether subsequent employment had aggravated subject injury which occurred in 2010; whether decision by the Personal Injury Commission (Commission) regarding reasonable necessity of the 2 subsequent surgeries affected claim; Commission Member found that both surgical procedures had not been reasonably necessary as no causative link established with subject 2010 injury; no appeal had been made from that decision; Medical Assessor ignored Member’s certificate of determination; Held – no appeal made from original Commission decision, and no submissions made thereon; Appeal Panel obliged to uphold appeal, commenting that there was a clear radiological link between the radiological studies of 2010 and 2015 which indicated a material contribution by subject injury to subsequent necessity for surgery; Commission’s original decision appeared to involve section 319 which raised the question of jurisdiction; Bindah v Carter Holt Harvey Woodproducts Australia Pty Ltd, and Jaffarie v Quality Castings Pty Ltd considered; Held – MAC revoked; new MAC issued with 7% WPI substituted.
Decision date: 3 March 2026 | Panel Members: Member John Wynyard, Dr David Crocker, and Dr Roger Pillemer| Injury module: Lumbar Spine
Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998; whether Medical Assessor had applied incorrect criteria and made a demonstrable error of law; Held – employer’s appeal dismissed as not raising any real issues in the proceedings pursuant to section 42(1); Medical Assessment Certificate confirmed.
Decision date: 3 March 2026 | Panel Members: Member John Wynyard, Professor Nicholas Glozier, and Dr Douglas Andrews| Injury module: Psychological/Psychiatric
Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998; appeal by psychologically injured claimant from 8% whole person impairment (WPI) assessment; whether additional report from psychologist fresh evidence; whether error made in class 2 rating for social and recreational activities; whether error made in class 1 rating for travel; whether claimant’s truthfulness and honesty relevant to assessment; in view of unanimous opinion of 22% by experts on each side of the record, the Medical Assessor’s (MA) reasons were inadequate; Held – fresh evidence rejected; claimant incorrect to assert that ‘going out’ was an essential part of social and recreational activities; Diaz v Sydney International Container Terminals Pty Ltd applied; travel rating increased to class 2 as evidence accepted by MA limited to familiar travel; self-report in truthful manner not determinative, psychiatric impairment rating scale authorities referred to; reasons adequate; Campbelltown City Council v Vegan, Wingfoot Australia Partners Pty Limited v Kocak, and El Masri v Woolworths Ltd considered; Medical Assessment Certificate (MAC) revoked; new MAC for 9% issued.
Decision date: 4 March 2026 | Panel Members: Member John Wynyard, Dr John Baker, and Dr Ash Takyar | Injury module: Psychological/Psychiatric
Gramza v Jakane Constructions Pty Ltd [2026] NSWPICMP 169
Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998; lump sum claim for injury to lumbar spine; worker appealed; no complaint about overall level of whole person impairment assessment; complaint on appeal about the deduction made by the Medical Assessor (MA) under section 323 of one-half; Appeal Panel considered that the MA’s reasoning failed to take into adequate account that the appellant returned to heavy manual work after the prior injury and it was only after the subject injury that he proceeded to multi-level surgery; taking adequate account of all of the available evidence, a one-tenth deduction was not inconsistent with the available evidence in circumstances where the deduction was difficult or costly to determine as stated by the MA and a one-tenth deduction should have been made; Held – Medical Assessment Certificate revoked.
Decision date: 4 March 2026| Panel Members: Member Jane Peacock, Dr Drew Dixon, and Dr Gregory McGroder| Injury module: Lumbar Spine
Randstad Pty Ltd v Johnstone [2026] NSWPICMP 170
Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998; assessment by Medical Assessor of a psychological injury under the psychiatric impairment rating scales (PIRS); appeal on the grounds of availability of additional relevant information; assessment made of the basis of incorrect criteria and demonstrable error; financial records of the respondent worker to be received on appeal; relevant to assessment of employability, travel and, social and recreational activities; appeal in respect of assessments in the PIRS scales of self-care and personal hygiene, and concentration, persistence and pace and employability; Appeal Panel satisfied error in assessment of self-care and personal hygiene, and concentration, persistence and pace, and employability; respondent worker re-examined. Held – Medical Assessment Certificate revoked.
Decision date: 4 March 2026| Panel Members: Member Carolyn Rimmer, Dr Michael Hong, and Dr John Lam-Po-Tang | Injury module: Psychological/Psychiatric
Secretary, Department of Education v Butfield [2026] NSWPICMP 171
Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998; whether Medical Assessor (MA) erred by incorrectly rating the respondent’s impairment due to a resection arthroplasty; whether MA erred by failing to rate respondent’s impairment due from a brachial plexus injury; Held – MA erred on both issues; respondent re-examined; Medical Assessment Certificate revoked.
Decision date: 12 March 2026| Panel Members: Member Marshal Douglas, Dr Drew Dixon, and Dr Tommasino Mastroianni| Injury module: Left Upper Extremity
Motor Accidents Merit Review Decision
Bonsu v Insurance Australia Limited t/as NRMA Insurance [2026] NSWPICMR 6
Motor Accident Injuries Act 2017; claim for statutory benefits under Part 3 and in particular benefits under section 3.26; dispute about reasonable cost of transport services provided to the claimant’s dependants for travel to and from school, to and from after school and sporting activities, and to church and church activities; claimant sought cost of private driver known to her; insurer agreed section 3.26 applied and that pre-conditions were met but considered rates of Uber or taxi and public transport reasonable; Held – there were inconsistencies and lack of clarity in the evidence; due to the amount in dispute and the unavailability of costs, no hearing was held to put inconsistencies and uncertainties to claimant; reasonable cost of travel to school to be based on public transport fares or the school bus service; reasonable cost of travel to after school activities to be a mix of public and private transport; reasonable cost of travel to weekend sport to be based on public transport fares; reasonable cost of children’s travel to church and youth group on their own to be by private transport; transport services do not have to be paid for upfront but reimbursed upon production of accounts and receipts; benefits are not to be discounted or set off by what the claimant would have incurred in travel costs but for the accident; Luntz and Harder “Assessment of Damages for Personal Injury and Death” cited; insurer’s decision set aside and remitted to the insurer for reconsideration; no costs available under the regulation; no submissions on costs received; no costs awarded.
Decision date: 27 February 2026| Merit Reviewer: Belinda Cassidy
This publication is for information only. The publication is not legal advice. The information provided is not a substitute for reading the decisions. The Commission does not accept liability for the information in this publication or for way the information is used.
Subscribeto receive legal bulletins to your inbox.