Arbitrator Wynyard had declined the appellant’s application for AMS referral for thoracic spine deterioration.
Roche DP allowed the appeal, remitted to another arbitrator with appeal costs $800 plus GST, arbitration costs dependent on AMS assessment.
The deputy president considered instant circumstances, and outlined lump sum process.
At : “Neither the 1998 Act nor the 1987 Act refer to claims for additional lump sum compensation because of the deterioration of a worker’s condition, or because of an increase in a previously assessed and compensated whole person impairment.
"Nevertheless, the right to claim such compensation cannot be doubted.
"The Workcover Guidelines make express reference to a worker being entitled to re-apply for ‘further evaluation of the condition’ if it deteriorates at a later time: cll 1.24 and 15.10. …
Later, in : “It is not necessary for the Commission to determine, as a threshold issue, whether the worker has demonstrated that his or her condition has deteriorated before the matter is referred to an AMS for a further assessment.
"A worker must make a claim under s 282 and support that claim with a whole person impairment assessment in the proper form from a Workcover trained assessor.
"If the assessment is the same as in a previous award or order of the Commission, there will be no basis for referral to an AMS.
"If the assessment is higher than in a previous award or order, then, assuming that there are no liability issues in dispute, the Registrar will refer the matter to an AMS for further assessment.”
A: Mr J Harris, inst Sanford Legal. R: Mr S Flett, inst Edwards Michael.