Policy

If it is determined that there has been an interruption to the client's journey, the disqualification provision (S6(2)(b)) only applies if the interruption 'substantially increased the risk of injury'.

The risk may have been increased because the member then had to complete the rest of their journey in:

• darkness
• heavier traffic or lighter traffic (driving at increased speed)
• inclement weather conditions, or
• a tired state.

The increased risk must be substantial, not just minor or measurable.

The suspension provisions of S57 have been deemed by the Federal Court to be 'self executing' and thus require no further determination by a Delegate to bring about the suspension. This means that following service of the Notice – which is incorporated in the letter advising the client of the date and time of the medical appointment – any unreasonable failure to attend automatically enacts the suspension.

If a claimant is unable to complete the claim form because of blindness or a disability such as mental incapacity, it is appropriate to accept a claim form certified by a person acting in the interests of that person.

In such cases, the name, address and relevant relationship of the person to the client must be provided on or with the claim form.

An injury will not be intentionally self-inflicted, where the client's state of mind is so disrupted that he or she is incapable of forming a clear intention.

The appropriate test for this state of mind is usefully discussed by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal in Re McLaren and Comcare (1992), where work-related stress caused a major depressive illness in the employee which led eventually to his suicide.

The employment connection is not necessarily broken if a member leaves their place of work for a cigarette or to buy morning tea or other similar reasons during work hours. Generally the member would still be in the course of their employment if this type of brief absence is an accepted practice or has tacit approval by their supervisor.

'Arose out of...' means that the injury was directly caused by the work that the employee had to do, or which was the result of an event which occurred in the workplace..

'In the course of...' means that the injury was caused by something less direct but nevertheless incidental to that work, from an incident whilst doing something that the person was authorised or could be reasonable expected to be doing.

Unsolicited medical reports (i.e. those not compiled at the instructions of the Delegate) are not always useful because:

Section 6(1)(b)(ii) of the SRCA says that an injury occurring during an employee's travel 'between his or her place of residence and place of work, other than during an ordinary recess in that employment' is compensable.

This circumstance is the most frequent source of travel claims for RCG.

The SRCA's formal inclusion of Cadet Corps members clarifies the status of such persons as 'employees' although they are unpaid. For further information on who qualifies as a member of the Cadet Corp see the Defcare commentary, which contains extensive quotes from the Defence Act.

Cadet Corps members were not formally provided for by the terms of the 1971 Act, but are and were included in pre-1988 coverage as a result of judicial decisions and government policy.

A claim for compensation made after the death of the claimant by the claimant's personal representative is a valid claim under S55(1) of the SRCA and a determination concerning initial liability should be made. Where liability is accepted, compensation (other than S17 death benefits) is paid to the estate of the claimant under S111 of the Act.

Note, however, that some compensation payments (e.g. S27 compensation for NEL) are not payable where the claimant is deceased.