Keywords: Queensland Industrial Relations Commission; QIRC; workers’ compensation; Workers’ Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 2003 (Qld); s 32 injury; s 132A application; aggravation of preexisting condition; knee injury.
By Honest Grace Legal | Workers’ Compensation Law | Oct 2025
Subject
Appeal allowed: incident and aggravation proven - Dwyer v Workers’ Compensation Regulator [2025] QIRC 119 (13 May 2025)
What Happened
- Job & incident: Mr Paul Damien Dwyer, an operator at the Farleigh Sugar Cane Mill, stepped on a drain grate in November 2018; it gave way, his left leg dropped ~20 cm and he felt knee pain. He taped the area and reported it to shift supervisor Mr Angus Hodge. Symptoms were mild and he kept working through season’s end.
- Later events: In June 2019 the appellant’s knee worsened during heavier seasonal duties. A separate 2019 compensation claim was first accepted then overturned on review (appeal later discontinued). The present matter concerns an application for an assessment of permanent impairment lodged 23 Aug 2021, initially rejected by WorkCover and confirmed by the Regulator on 19 Oct 2022. Mr Dwyer appealed to the QIRC on 17 Nov 2022.
Key Legal Issues
- Did the November 2018 incident occur?
- Did it cause a “personal injury” under s 32 - as a new injury or aggravation of preexisting degeneration?
- Did the injury arise out of employment and was employment a significant contributing factor?
What the Court Decided
- Appeal allowed.
- Review decision set aside; substituted decision: Mr Dwyer’s s 132A application for an assessment of permanent impairment is one for acceptance.
- Costs: The Regulator to pay Mr Dwyer’s costs (amount to be agreed; liberty to apply).
Key Findings
- Incident & report accepted: The Commission preferred Mr Dwyer’s credible account; Mr Hodge’s lack of recollection and process-based speculation did not displace it.
- Injury need not have a single precise label: A finding of personal injury is open even without fixing one exact diagnosis.
- Aggravation proven on medical evidence: The Regulator’s expert, Dr Salman, accepted that, if the incident occurred, Mr Dwyer “most likely” aggravated a chronic meniscal tear - an aggravation within s 32(3)(b). The Commission accepted this.
- Employment connection: The injury arose at work and employment was a significant contributing factor (meaning “important” or “of consequence”).
Outcome
On a de novo assessment, the Commission found the incident occurred and placed weight on Dr Salman’s in hearing evidence that the event most likely aggravated a preexisting knee condition, which meets s 32(3)(b). Because the event happened during ordinary duties at the workplace and materially contributed to the injury, s 32(1) was satisfied. The Regulator’s decision was set aside and acceptance of the s 132A application was substituted to allow for an assessment of permanent impairment. Costs were awarded to the Appellant.
Why This Case Matters
- Credible testimony can prove an incident even years later despite no paperwork or supervisor recall.
- Aggravation counts: Preexisting conditions do not bar recovery if an aggravation is proven on the balance of probabilities.
- No diagnostic perfection required: The Commission may find a personal injury without resolving competing diagnostic labels.
- “Significant” ≠ “substantial”: Reaffirms that “significant” means “important” or “of consequence.”
- s 132A pathway clarified: Acceptance allows assessment of permanent impairment and does not of itself confer compensation.