Injury attributable to pre-existing back disease
Geary v REJV Services Pty Ltd & Ors [2011] QSC
This case emphasises the importance of gathering past medical information to establish the extent of symptoms suffered due to pre-existing degeneration prior to the work event.
Geary v REJV Services Pty Ltd & Ors [2011] QSC
North J
21 December 2011
Background
The worker was injured on a mine site on 17 August 2005 when a 56 tonne rock was dropped into the back of his dump truck causing the claimant to be significantly jolted. He suffered an injury to his lumbar spine and a secondary psychiatric injury. Apportionment was agreed between the four defendants prior to trial and proceeded on a quantum only basis.
The facts
At trial, the worker maintained that, apart from an episode in 1985, he had suffered no symptoms in his lower back until the subject incident in 2005. This was inconsistent with evidence led by the defendants at trial. The worker also gave evidence that since the subject incident he suffered persistent back pain which significantly restricted him, despite the worker being able to gain various employment following the incident. The worker gave evidence that he faced difficulties managing his work activities.
The defendants mounted a considerable attack on the worker's credit particularly in relation to the worker's varied histories provided to medical practitioners, his history of violent altercations and his abuse of alcohol.
Judgement
His Honour accepted that the worker had misled the medical specialists and various employers regarding his lower back injury.
His Honour considered that "the difficulty is that all three doctors reported on the assumption that the worker did not have any symptoms between 1985 and the accident. I have found to the contrary."
Ultimately, His Honour considered the "assessment of damages should be on a basis that the worker's post accident impairment assessed by the doctors attributable to the pre-existing back disease was greater than the doctors considered and that it was likely that, by the time of the accident or shortly after, he would have begun to suffer restrictions in working in employment of the nature he described."
His Honour heavily discounted past economic loss by 80%. Future economic loss was allowed at $200,000, notionally equating to a loss of $300 per week until the age of 67.
Overall quantum was allowed at $367,449.13 clear of the WorkCover refund of $12,900.25.
Appeal
This matter is currently under appeal.