Browsing: Workers' comp decisions (WA)

A worker with a psychological condition was denied natural justice in a case examining his claim that his manager acted unreasonably by informing him, prior to the completion of his performance review, that he was going to receive a poor rating, a judge has found.

An injured worker's right to access benefits must not depend on whether he or she can prove the exact date the injury occurred, given many conditions are caused by an "accumulation of activities" or aren't immediately symptomatic, a judge has ruled.

An appeals court has rejected an employer's claim that it wasn't negligent in failing to instruct workers on a safe system of work or obvious risks because it would have been patronising to do so, given the workers' high level of experience.

A court has examined the scope of a principal contractor's safety duties to the employees of subcontractors, in rejecting an injured worker's claim that the principal should have prevented his employer from requiring him to work in cramped spaces.

An employer was not required to embark on a formal risk assessment process for the "light-hearted recreational activities" it organised for a Melbourne Cup event, and could not be held vicariously liable for the alleged injury-causing actions of an employee at the event, a court has found.

James Hardie has been ordered to pay for expensive, advanced immunotherapy treatment for a mesothelioma sufferer, in a landmark case setting a "significant precedent" for future damages awards for workplace victims and others.

• RTW pressures contribute to work injury;
  
• Lag and lead indicators underpin national RTW plan; and
  
• Safety guidelines for electrical-asset neighbours made in WA.

An appeals court has upheld and then increased a worker's $2 million damages award, in finding an employer should have tagged out or stored away defective equipment, which was so loud when it was accidentally activated that it seriously injured the startled worker.

An employer has unsuccessfully argued, on appeal, that it isn't liable for a worker's shoulder injuries, which she sustained performing a lifting task she had raised concerns about.

In an important ruling on seemingly inconsistent provisions on employers' obligations to injured workers, an appeals court has found an assaulted worker is entitled to recover the costs of travelling thousands of kilometres for an impairment assessment, with a view to suing for damages.