Injury Compensation Case Result

Injury Compensation Case Summary

The worker was employed by a Commonwealth employer, at the time she sustained injury. This claim was therefore brought under the ‘Safety, Rehabilitation & Compensation Act 1988 (Cth), and is otherwise known as a ‘Comcare claim’.

In the course of her employment, the worker sustained a ‘repetitive strain injury’ (“RSI”) to her right wrist, as a result of the repetitive use of a keyboard and mouse in her administration role. In August 2018, the worker lodged a workers compensation claim for her right wrist presentation. Her employer made some ergonomic changes to her work-station, and she returned to work for several months. The worker eventually ceased working altogether in October 2019. As a result of her RSI, she has not returned to any employment since this time.

We initially assisted the worker with a liability dispute; we were successful at the then ‘Administrative Appeals Tribunal’ (now, the ‘Administrative Review Tribunal’) and ensured the insurer’s continued payment of her weekly benefits and medical treatment expenses. She is still in receipt of the same.  

We investigated the worker’s entitlement to lump sum compensation, and were advised by our medico-legal doctors that the worker’s RSI amounted to 20% whole person impairment. We therefore lodged a claim for lump sum compensation. Ultimately, we were required to progress the dispute to the Administrative Review Tribunal, which resulted in the worker agreeing to settle her lump sum claim for $76,882.67 (inclusive of costs). This is a tax-free payment, and did not affect her ongoing entitlement to weekly benefits and medical treatment expenses. Should the worker’s condition deteriorate, she may be able to lodge a further lump sum claim for that deterioration.

Date of Injury: 6 August 2018

Date of Lump Sum Settlement: 15 May 2025

Total Settlement: $76,882.67

📞 Call us: 02 4626 5077
📍 Visit us: See our locations

The contents of this publication are for reference purposes only. This publication does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as legal advice. Specific legal advice should always be sought separately before taking any action based on this publication.