Legal Bulletin No. 279

Issued 25 September 2026

Welcome to the two hundred and seventy-ninth 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.

Presidential Member Decisions

Cruceanu v Vix Technology (Aust) Pty Ltd [2026] NSWPICPD 43

Appeal; s 352(5) of the Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998; whether error affected decision ;Zelimir Ostojic t/as Nickol’s Painting Services v Markovic [2026] NSWPICPD 21, Mars Australia Pty Limited v Knight [2025] NSWCA 2 229; State of New South Wales v Culhana [2025] NSWCA 157; 117 NSWLR 448; 342 IR 302, Fisher v Nonconformist Pty Ltd [2024] NSWCA 32; 114 NSWLR 1 applied; estoppel ;res judicata, Anshun estoppel, issue estoppel considered; Blair v Curran (1939) 62 CLR 464, Port of Melbourne Authority v Anshun Pty Ltd [1981] HCA 45; 147 CLR 589, Lambidis v Commissioner of Police (1995) 37 NSWLR 320, Kuligowski v Metrobus [2004] HCA 34; 220 CLR 363, Fourmeninapub Pty Ltd v Booth [2019] NSWWCCPD 25, Booth v Fourmeninapub Pty Ltd [2020] NSWCA 57, Miller v Secretary, Department of Communities and Justice (No. 10) [2022] NSWCA 190; 109 NSWLR 435; 318 IR 281 applied; proceedings precluded by res judicata or, alternatively, by Anshun estoppel; expert evidence; medical evidence did not identify reasoning process; Makita (Australia) Pty Ltd v Sprowles [2001] NSWCA 305; 52 NSWLR 705; 25 NSWCCR 218, Hancock v East Coast Timber Products Pty Ltd [2011] NSWCA 11; 80 NSWLR 43; 8 DDCR 399, State of New South Wales (Sydney Local Health District) v Edwards [2024] NSWPICPD 83 applied; workers compensation; s 4(b)(ii) of the Workers Compensation Act 1987; ‘aggravation, etc.’ considered; Federal Broom Co. Pty Ltd v Semlitch [1964] HCA 34; 110 CLR 626 applied; ‘main contributing factor’ considered, AV v AW [2020] NSWWCCPD 9 applied; Held – the appeal is dismissed; the Certificate of Determination of Member Isaksen dated 14 October 2025 is confirmed.

Decision date: 10 September 2026 | Before: Deputy President the Hon. Adam Searle

State of New South Wales (Fire & Rescue NSW) v Sinclair [2026] NSWPICPD 45 (Sinclair No 5)

Workers compensation; costs reserved pending final determination of the dispute; clause 2(3) of the Workers Compensation Regulation 2016; Held – pursuant to clause 2(3) of the Workers

Compensation Regulation 2016 (NSW) the costs of this appeal are reserved pending the final determination of the respondent’s claim.

Decision date: 11 September 2026 | Before: President Judge Phillips

MidCoast Council v Piggott [2026] NSWPICPD 47

Workers compensation; section 60 of the Workers Compensation Act 1987; whether causal nexus between injuries and total knee replacements; alleged failure to give adequate reasons and denial of procedural fairness; application of Broken Hill Cobalt Project Pty Ltd v Lord [2022] NSWCA 271 to rule 78 of the Personal Injury Commission Rules 2021; failure to address relevant evidence; application of Dranichnikov v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs [2003] HCA 26 doubted; Waterways Authority v Fitzgibbon [2005] HCA 57 considered and applied; Held – pursuant to clause 2(3) of the Workers Compensation Regulation 2016 (NSW) the costs of this appeal are reserved pending the final determination of the respondent’s claim.

Decision date: 15 September 2026 | Before: Acting Deputy President Paul Sweeney

Motor Accidents non-Presidential Member Decision

Wade v Insurance Australia Limited t/as NRMA Insurance [2026] NSWPIC 531

Motor Accident Injuries Act 2017; settlement approval; claimant was injured on 19 February 2024; claimant was working at the time of the accident; claimant is aware this approval resolves common law damages claim; settlement complies with clause 7.37 of the Motor Accident Injuries Guidelines; settlement approved in the amount of $54,794.65, consisting of nil non-economic loss, past economic loss of $34,794.65 and $20,000 by way of buffer for future economic loss.

Decision date: 11 September 2026 | Member: Philip Carr

Workers Compensation non-Presidential Member Decisions

Nolan v State of New South Wales (Fire & Rescue NSW) & Ors [2026] NSWPIC 532

Workers Compensation Act 1987 (1987 Act); Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998 (1998 Act); claim for benefits in respect of the death of a worker; liability admitted by respondent to pay lump sum pursuant to s 25(1)(a) of the 1987 Act; determination needed as to those dependent on the worker for support; determination needed as to the applicant’s entitlements to interest pursuant to section 109 of the 1998 Act, and to costs including a complexity uplift in accordance with Table 4, Item 4 to Schedule 6 of the Workers Compensation Regulation 2016; consideration of statement evidence, claim correspondence, medical evidence and factual material; Lake v Hunter Institute of Technology considered; Held – no other person but the applicant was dependent on the worker for support; award entered in favour of the applicant in relation to the entire lump sum payable pursuant to section 25(1)(a) of the 1987 Act, together with agreed interest pursuant to section 109 of the 1998 Act; 15% complexity uplift ordered in relation to the applicant’s costs.

Decision date: 11 September 2026 | Member: Gaius Whiffin

Islam v State of New South Wales (Northern Sydney Local Health District) [2026] NSWPIC 533

Workers Compensation Act 1987; weekly compensation and medical expenses; whether effects of accepted physical injuries have passed; whether applicant developed secondary psychological condition as a result of the accepted injuries; incapacity, whether applicant still incapacitated as a result of injuries; competing submissions on appropriate pre-injury average weekly earnings (PIAWE) applicable at date of injury; Held – the effects of the accepted injuries are ongoing; applicant suffered a secondary psychological injury; applicant was and remains totally incapacitated for employment as a result of his injuries; respondent’s calculations in relation to PIAWE are accepted; proposed surgery is reasonably necessary as a result of the applicant’s injury; respondent is to pay weekly compensation for total incapacity in accordance with section 37 from 2 July 2025 to date and continuing; respondent to pay the costs of and incidental to the proposed surgery.

Decision date: 11 September 2026 | Member: Cameron Burge

Turner v Connected Advice Pty Limited [2026] NSWPIC 534

Workers Compensation Act 1987; claim for weekly compensation and treatment expenses arising out of workplace injury on 6 October 2023; applicant claimed subsequent injury at home whilst playing soccer caused aggravation or alternatively would not have occurred had it not been for the injury on 6 October 2023 relying on the first two limbs of State Government Insurance Commission v Oakley; respondent maintains novus actus event causing a break in the causal chain between the original incident and the applicant’s subsequent hospitalisation post soccer event; no treatment, diagnosis or investigation following original workplace event on 6 October 2023; diagnosis, investigation and treatment only commenced after soccer incident in domestic circumstances;   symptoms following the injury on 6 October 2023 confined to the back; symptoms following soccer incident resulted in severe leg pain and back pain; limbs one and two of Oakley not established.  Applicant failed to discharge onus; Held – award for the respondent.

Decision date: 14 September 2026 | Member: Diana Benk

Liu v K & T Metal Fabrications Pty ltd [2026] NSWPIC 535

Workers Compensation Act 1987; accepted left knee injury; parties accept the applicant requires left total knee replacement surgery; sole issue for determination was whether the total knee replacement is required because of the accepted left knee injury or is required due to the applicant’s underlying degenerative knee condition; Held – on the balance of probabilities, satisfied and find that the applicant’s accepted left knee injury sustained in the course of his employment with the respondent has materially contributed to the need for the total left knee replacement and that the surgery is reasonably necessary as a consequence of the accepted left knee injury.

Decision date: 14 September 2026 | Member: David Cooper

Kaleel v Myer Holdings Pty Limited [2026] NSWPIC 536

Workers Compensation Act 1987 (1987 Act); Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998 (1998 Act); claim for psychological injury; claim for lump sum compensation pursuant to section 66 of the 1987 Act; applicant already assessed by Medical Assessor, and Medical Assessment Certificate (MAC) issued; applicant lodged Appeal against the MAC relying upon grounds under sections 327(3)(c) and 327(3)(d) of the 1998 Act; Appeal not referred to Medical Appeal Panel in accordance with section 327(4) of the 1998 Act and Certificate of Determination (COD) subsequently issued; applicant applying for COD to be reconsidered and rescinded in order to be able to lodge a further Appeal against the MAC relying upon grounds under sections 327(3)(a) and 327(3)(b) of the 1998 Act; consideration of whether the Personal Injury Commission (Commission) should exercise its discretion pursuant to section 57(1) of the Personal Injury Commission Act 2020 to reconsider the COD and if so, what orders should the Commission make; Samuel v Sebel Furniture Ltd, Railcorp NSW v Registrar of the WCC of NSW, Ballas v Department of Education (State of NSW), Riverina Wines Pty Ltd v Registrar of the Workers Compensation Commission of NSW & Ors, and Sleiman v Gadalla Pty Ltd considered and applied; Held – in the exercise of the Commission’s discretion pursuant to section 57(1) of the PIC Act,  application to reconsider the COD is refused; the applicant’s reconsideration application is dismissed.

Decision date: 15 September 2026 | Member: Gaius Whiffin

Symons v State of New South Wales - Fire and Rescue NSW [2026] NSWPIC 537

Workers Compensation Act 1987 (1987 Act); Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998 (1998 Act); claim for benefits in respect of the death of a worker; liability admitted by respondent to pay lump sum pursuant to section 25(1)(a) of the 1987 Act; determination needed as to those dependent on the worker for support; determination needed as to the applicant’s entitlement to interest pursuant to section 109 of the 1998 Act; consideration of statement evidence, claim correspondence, and factual material; Held – no other person but the applicant was dependent on the worker for support; award entered in favour of the applicant in relation to the entire lump sum payable pursuant to section 25(1)(a) of the 1987 Act, together with agreed interest pursuant to section 109 of the 1998 Act, together with legal costs.

Decision date: 15 September 2026 | Member: Gaius Whiffin

Motor Accidents Medical Review Panel Decisions

Chmali v QBE Insurance (Australia) Limited [2026] NSWPICMP 679

Motor Accident Injuries Act 2017; section 1.6(3); threshold injury; post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD); somatic symptom disorder; generalised anxiety disorder; assessment of threshold injury under section 1.6(3); claimant suffered injury in a motor vehicle accident on 10 September 2019; Medical Assessor (MA) found the claimant sustained an adjustment disorder caused by the accident and a somatic symptom disorder which was a constitutional injury; MA certified a threshold injury; claimant sought review; Held – Review Panel found claimant not suffering from PTSD; symptoms consistent with somatic symptom disorder; temporal relationship between accident and somatic symptom disorder; claimant meets criteria for generalised anxiety disorder caused by accident; pre-accident claimant would not fulfil diagnostic criteria for generalised anxiety disorder; certificate of MA revoked, somatic symptom disorder and generalised anxiety disorder are non-threshold injuries.

Decision date: 10 September 2026| Panel Members: Senior Member Susan McTegg, Dr Melissa Barrett, and Dr Paul Friend| Injury module: Mental and Behavioural

Stefanoski v QBE Insurance (Australia) Limited [2026] NSWPICMP 680

Motor Accident Injuries Act 2017; claimant injured in a motor vehicle accident in July 2024; dispute as to whether the proposed treatment and care relates to the injury caused by the motor accident and was reasonable and necessary in the circumstances; Medical Assessor assessed claimant; certified L5/S1 posterior decompression and posterior interbody fusion surgery relates to injury caused by accident and is reasonable and necessary in the circumstances; on review, claimant re-examined by Review Panel; Held – Review Panel affirmed determination of the MA.

Decision date: 10 September 2026 | Panel Members: Member Terence Stern OAM, Dr Drew Dixon, and Dr David Gorman| Treatment Type: Surgery

Ren v QBE Insurance (Australia) Ltd [2026] NSWPICMP 684

Motor Accident Injuries Act 2017; motor accident on 4 July 2024; rear end collision; claimant with multiple complaints of injury; anxiety condition affecting recollection and nature of complaints; David v Allianz Australia Ltd applied; no present or past radiculopathy as defined in Motor Accidents Guidelines; no error of principle in assessment of other body parts; claimant sought further physiotherapy in circumstances where there had been over 100 sessions; further physiotherapy from passive therapy no enduring benefit other than short-term relief; Held – claimant physical injuries assessed as threshold; proposed further physiotherapy not reasonable and necessary.

Decision date: 11 September 2026| Panel Members: Principal Member John Harris, Dr Sophia Lahz, and Dr Margaret Gibson| Injury module: Brain, Nervous System, Spine, Upper Limb, and Lower Limb; Treatment Type: Physiotherapy

KHA v Insurance Australia Limited t/as NRMA [2026] NSWPICMP 685

Motor Accidents Injuries Act 2017; permanent impairment dispute; psychological injuries; claimant was on a motorcycle when a car pulled out in front of him causing a collision; original Medical Assessment Certificate (MAC) diagnosed major depressive disorder and assessed whole person impairment (WPI) at 7%; review application relied on different accounts of the claimant’s psychological functioning; Held – Review Panel re-examined and noted psychological symptoms had improved over time despite still being present; Review Panel diagnosed persistent depressive disorder and assessed WPI at 7%; Review Panel relies on own findings at the time of the re-examination as required under clause 6.21 of the Motor Accidents Guidelines; change of diagnosis requires revocation of MAC; new MAC issued.

Decision date: 11 September 2026 | Panel Members: Member Jeremy Lum, Dr Wayne Mason, and Dr John Lam-Po-Tang | Injury module: Mental and Behavioural

Wiltshire v Allianz Australia Insurance Limited [2026] NSWPICMP 689

Motor Accident Injuries Act 2017; insurer’s review of medical assessment certificate under section 7.26; permanent impairment dispute; referred injuries - cervical spine, thoracic spine, right shoulder, and fractured of right 8th rib; motor accident involving violent forces where claimant’s vehicle was hit at considerable speed resulting in her vehicle rolling over several times; compression fractures T3 and T4; whether thoracic spine injury involved multilevel structural compromise attracting Diagnosis-Related Estimates (DRE) category IV or V rating or whether it involved one or more end-plate fractures attracting DRE category II rating for assessment of permanent impairment; where the single Medical Assessor assessed the thoracic spine injury as DRE category IV attracting a whole person impairment (WPI) of 25% and the right shoulder injury with a WPI assessed at 5%, resulting in an overall WPI of  29%; claimant re-examined; where compression fractures of T4 and T3 were seen on MRI and not CT scan; where the Review Panel assessed the thoracic spine injury as end-plate fractures attracting DRE category II rating giving rise to a WPI of 5%; where the Review Panel assessed a WPI of 7% for the right shoulder injury with an overall assessment of permanent impairment of 12%; Clauses 6.143 to 6.151 of the Motor Accident Guidelines considered; Held – original medical assessment certificate finding permanent impairment of 29% revoked; WPI assessed at 12%.

Decision date: 14 September 2026 | Panel Members: Member Maurice Castagnet, Dr David Gorman, and Dr Shane Moloney | Injury module: Spine, and Upper Limb

JCS v AAI Limited trading as GIO Insurance [2026] NSWPICMP 691

Motor Accident Injuries Act 2017; review of certificate and reasons of Medical Assessor (MA) dated 12 September 2025 going to consideration of a psychiatric threshold injury; MA diagnosed the claimant as having an adjustment disorder with mixed anxious and depressed mood which is a threshold injury; claimant injured in an accident on 29 September 2023 when  car was forced off the road and mounted a curb; claimant had been involved in an earlier serious accident in 2014 when she was run over by a car on the footpath when she was a pedestrian and consequently suffered serious injuries including a traumatic brain injury; subject accident raised past memories for the claimant; prior to the accident the claimant had been treated for anorexia nervosa which diagnosis is currently an issue but the Review Panel was not satisfied that the accident had aggravated this pre-existing diagnosis; Review Panel diagnosed the claimant as having an exacerbation of a pre-existing adjustment disorder with mixed anxiety and depressed mood which is a threshold injury; Held – certificate of MA revoked; de-identification direction made by the Review Panel.

Decision date: 14 September 2026 | Panel Members: Member Alexander Bolton, Dr Wayne Mason, and Dr John Lam-Po-Tang | Injury module: Mental and Behavioural

Kwon v Allianz Australia Insurance Limited [2026] NSWPICMP 692

Motor Accident Injuries Act 2017;  claimant’s review application of Medical Assessment Certificate (MAC) under section 7.26; permanent impairment dispute; injuries to lumbar spine, thoracic spine, cervical spine and both shoulders; scarring in the right shoulder region following surgery; treatment and care dispute; proposed treatment of cervical spine injury by way of C5/6 and C6/7 discectomies and fusions and C4/5 arthroplasty; where the Medical Assessor (MA) assessed permanent impairment of 10% and found that the proposed treatment was not reasonable and necessary in the circumstances on the basis that the motor accident only caused a soft tissue injury to the cervical spine; claimant re-examined by the review panel; where the review panel  assessed permanent impairment of 4%; where the review panel confirmed the MA’s finding that the proposed treatment was not reasonable and necessary in the circumstances on the basis that the motor accident only caused a soft tissue injury to the cervical spine; Held – original MAC revoked as a result of the review panel’s different assessment for permanent impairment.

Decision date: 14 September 2026 | Panel Members: Member Maurice Castagnet, Dr Shane Moloney, and Dr Drew Dixon| Injury module: Spine, and Upper Limb; Treatment Type: Surgery

Veper v Allianz Australia Insurance Limited [2026] NSWPICMP 700

Motor Accident Injuries Act 2017; threshold psychiatric injury; re-examination by Review Panel; Medical Assessor (MA) determined threshold injury; Review Panel diagnosed Major Depressive Disorder with Anxious Distress single episode in partial remission; Review Panel identified symptoms justifying diagnosis; Review Panel identified significant functional impairment during acute phase; Panel determined injury not threshold injury; Held – Review Panel revoked MA’s Medical Assessment Certificate (MAC); new MAC substituted.

Decision date: 15 September 2026| Panel Members: Member Terence Stern OAM, Dr Matthew Jones, and Dr Ankur Gupta | Injury module: Mental and Behavioural

Nguyen v Insurance Australia Limited t/as NRMA Insurance [2026] NSWPICMP 702

Motor Accident Injuries Act 2017; section 1.6(3); threshold injury: post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD); claimant suffered injury in a motor vehicle accident on 27 February 2024; Medical Assessor (MA) found the claimant sustained PTSD caused by the accident, a non-threshold injury; insurer sought review; Held – Review Panel assessed the claimant and diagnosed PTSD caused by the accident; Medical Assessment Certificate of MA affirmed.

Decision date: 16 September 2026| Panel Members: Senior Member Susan McTegg, Dr Christopher Canaris, and Dr John Baker| Injury module: Mental and Behavioural

Workers Compensation Medical Appeal Panel Decisions

Robertson v State of New South Wales (New South Wales Police Force) [2026] NSWPICMP 678

Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998; psychological injury; lump sum claim; appellant worker challenged the assessments in two of the six psychiatric impairment rating scale categories, namely social and recreational activities and employability; error found in the domain of employability; Held – Medical Assessment Certificate (MAC) revoked; new MAC issued.

Decision date: 9 September 2026| Panel Members: Member Jane Peacock, Dr Michael Hong, and Dr John Lam-Po-Tang | Injury module: Psychiatric/Psychological

Walters v Western Star Civil and Constructions Pty Ltd [2026] NSWPICMP 682

Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998; Medical Appeal Panel; appeal by worker in respect of assessment of WPI of 9%; worker alleged error in application of incorrect criteria and demonstrable error in relation to the non-diagnosis of chronic regional pain syndrome (CRPS) and the assessment of finger impairment on basis there was CRPS; claimant sought admission of fresh evidence; Held – all fresh evidence allowed in; no error in relation to diagnosis and therefore no error in finger impairment; Medical Assessment Certificate confirmed.

Decision date: 10 September 2026| Panel Members: Member Belinda Cassidy, Dr Alan Home, and Dr David Lewington| Injury module: Right Lower Extremity

State of NSW (South Western Sydney Local Health District) v Ghalehnow [2026] NSWPICMP 683

Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998; appeal from table of disabilities in the Medical Assessment Certificate (MAC); whether section 323 assessment was erroneous; whether 10% and 12.5% apparent deductions appropriate; whether assessment unclear; whether incorrect date of injury in body of MAC demonstrable error; whether contradiction in MA finding that no deduction applicable with finding deduction in Table 1 of Certificate; Held – claimant had suffered left hip injury by falling off platform and being crushed by a train in 1985, which necessitated arthrodesis and subsequent 1988 hip replacement, returned to work in January 1996 and was injured in a slip and fall in February 1997; Medical Assessor may have copied earlier Certificate of Determination from 2020 in giving deductions for back and left leg when he had said no deduction applicable; parties appeared to be unaware that the deductions certified were not 10% and 12.5% respectively, but rather 50% and 58%; no reasons given for finding; Cole v Wenaline Pty Ltd, and Ryder v Sundance Bakehouse considered; MAC revoked; new MAC issued.

Decision date: 10 September 2026 | Panel Members: Member John Wynyard, Dr Tim Anderson, and Dr Robert Kuru | Injury module: Lumbar Spine, Right Upper Extremity, Left Upper Extremity, Right Lower Extremity, and Left Lower Extremity

Samuel v State of New South Wales (NSW Ambulance) [2026] NSWPICMP 686

Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998; appellant lodged an appeal against a Medical Assessment Certificate (MAC) in which the Medical Assessor (MA) assessed the appellant with 9% whole person impairment (WPI) resulting from psychological injury sustained in the course of his employment; appellant essentially submitted the MA had erred in assessment of the appellant’s impairment in the areas of social and recreational activities, travel and social functioning and in the alternative the MA had failed to provide adequate reasons for his decisions; respondent essentially submitted the MA was not in error in his assessment of the appellant’s impairments in relation to these areas of functioning and the MA had not failed to provide adequate reasons for his decisions; Held – the Appeal Panel is not of the view the MA’s assessment was made on the basis of incorrect error and the MAC contains demonstrate error; MAC confirmed.

Decision date: 11 September 2026 | Panel Members: Member Jacqueline Snell, Professor Nicholas Glozier, and Dr Ash Takyar | Injury module: Psychiatric/Psychological

Claire v The University of Sydney [2026] NSWPICMP 687

Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998; appeal from decision of a Medical Assessor; demonstrable error; application of incorrect criteria in applying psychiatric impairment rating scale; sufficiency of reasons for section 323 deduction; error not established; Held – Medical Assessment Certificate confirmed.

Decision date: 11 September 2026| Panel Members: Member Mitchell Strachan, Dr Douglas Andrews, and Dr Michael Hong | Injury module: Psychiatric/Psychological

Hastie v K N H Constructions Pty Ltd [2026] NSWPICMP 694

Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998; appellant submits that the Medical Assessor erred in failing to assess motor dysfunction of the left elbow/left upper extremity; appellant does not challenge the assessment of sensory deficit or scarring; Appeal Panel agreed; re-examination required; Appeal Panel found errors in the Medical Assessment Certificate (MAC) as claimed by the appellant; MAC revoked; new MAC issued.

Decision date: 14 September 2026| Panel Members: Member Deborah Moore, Dr Alan Home, and Dr Drew Dixon | Injury module: Left Upper Extremity, and Scarring (TEMSKI)

Chahine v Roman Plant Hire Pty Ltd [2026] NSWPICMP 696

Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998; medical review of Medical Assessment Certificate (MAC); section 323 for previous injury to the right ankle; failure to assesses scarring;  scarring not included in referral or Application to Resolve a Dispute; insurer neither opposed or consented to the scarring being assessed; an absence of medical evidence that demonstrated complaint or difficulty in respect of right ankle before 2017 unrelated injury and the work related injury of 10 December 2020; one-third deducted by original Medical Assessor not supported by the evidence; one-tenth deduction pursuant to section 323 appropriate and applied; scarring assessed; MAC revoked; new MAC issued with a whole person impairment assessed at 16%.

Decision date: 14 September 2026| Panel Members: Member Elizabeth Medland, Dr Tim Anderson, and Dr Tommasino Mastroianni | Injury module: Right Lower Extremity, Digestive System, and Scarring

Doyle v Australian Bakels (Pty) Ltd [2026] NSWPICMP 698

Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998; assessment of a psychological/psychiatric injury; appeal on the grounds of incorrect criteria and demonstrable error; Appeal Panel satisfied that there was no error in the assessment of travel; Appeal Panel found errors in assessment of concentration, persistence and pace, social functioning and employability; Held – MAC revoked.

Decision date: 14 September 2026| Panel Members: Member Carolyn Rimmer, Professor Nicholas Glozier, and Dr Ash Takyar| Injury module: Psychiatric/Psychological

Williams v Advanced Mechanical Services Pty Ltd [2026] NSWPICMP 699

Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998; assessment of psychiatric injury; appeal on the grounds of additional relevant information, incorrect criteria and demonstrable error; Appeal Panel determined that the additional relevant information was not of such probative value that it was reasonably clear it would change the outcome of the case; additional relevant information not received on appeal; Appeal Panel not persuaded that the Medical Assessor (MA) applied incorrect criteria by substituting her diagnosis for that of the condition referred to her; Appeal Panel satisfied that the MA assessed the condition referred and did not apply a preclusion to a diagnosis that was not consistent with the medical evidence; Held – Medical Assessment Certificate confirmed.

Decision date: 14 September 2026| Panel Members: Member Carolyn Rimmer, Professor Nicholas Glozier, and Dr Michael Hong | Injury module: Psychiatric/Psychological

Bowne v State of New South Wales (NSW Police Force) [2026] NSWPICMP 701

Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998; appeal from 7% whole person impairment for psychological injury; whether Medical Assessor (MA) erred in failing to take into account the claimant’s statement, or the ratings of the medico-legal specialists in concentration and employability categories; whether adequate reasons given; Held – general principles regarding assessment in this domain considered; general principles as to the function of MA; Wingfoot Australia Partners Pty Ltd v Kocak, and Campbelltown City Council v Vegan considered; there was no requirement for a MA to refer to all the evidence before him, however MA erred by failing to explain why he differed from the unanimous ratings given by the medical specialists, and erred further by stating that only the claimant’s expert ratings differed from his; claimant re-examined, resulting in a higher employability rating, but leaving the same entitlement; Held – Medical Assessment Certificate confirmed.

Decision date: 15 September 2026 | Panel Members: Member John Wynyard, Dr Ash Takyar, and Dr John Baker | Injury module: Psychiatric/Psychological

Motor Accidents Merit Review Decision

Orangkhadivi v Allianz Australia Insurance Limited [2026] NSWPICMR 39

Motor Accident Injuries Act 2017; schedule 1 clause 4; earner; change of circumstances; pre-accident weekly earnings; merit review dispute; claimant injured in a motor accident on 28 February 2025; dispute as to whether the claimant was an earner under the Act; she alleged she had entered into an arrangement on 25 February 2025 to commence employment on 3 March 2025; the accident intervened; she was unable to commence work and the agreement was terminated; insurer queried the veracity of the employment given the lack of email communication between the employer and the claimant and where no original records were available; Held – the veracity of the offer of employment was demonstrated by email communication by the employer with the claimant and with the insurer’s investigator; phone records verified pre-accident communication between claimant and employer; the claimant had established a change in circumstances as per schedule 1 clause 4(3) of the Act; claimant an earner under schedule 1 clause 2(b) of the Act; Held – reviewable decision revoked.

Decision date: 11 September 2026| Merit Reviewer: Senior Member Susan McTegg

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.