NSW Caselaw
CRISP v CHAPMAN SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES COURT OF APPEAL
MAHONEY, MEAGHER and POWELL JJA 19 July 1994, 18 August 1994
[1994] NSWCA 73
WORKERS' COMPENSATION Compensable injuries — What constitutes injury — Disease — "Industrial disease' — Shearer — Spinal canal stenosis — Causing incapacity — Last employer liable.
Workers Compensation — Compensable injuries — What constitutes injury — Disease — "Industrial disease" — Shearer — Spinal canal stenosis — Causing incapacity — Last employer liable.
A, who had been a shearer by occupation for about 25 years, had, by January 1987, developed marked spinal canal stenosis, with which there were associated disc bulges in the lumbar area and compression of the spinal column.
In the 12 months prior to January 1987, A had worked as a shearer for shout 15 or more different pastoralists.
In December 1986, while shearing on R(2)'s property, and January 1987, while shearing on R(1)'s property, A experienced symptoms which led him to cease work in January 1987.
Over the course of the following 21/2 years, or thereabouts, A was treated for his condition; at first the treatment was conservative, but, later, surgery became necessary. Surgery was first undertaken in November 1987, and a laminectomy was carried out in August 1989.
In March 1989 there was filed on behalf of A an Application in which A sought against R(1) and R(2) compensation for his incapacity.
When the application was filed, the claim for compensation was based on "frank injuries" said to have been sustained as the result of separate incidents occurring while A was shearing for R(2) and R(1) in December 1986 and January 1987.
Later, the Application was amended to base the claim for compensation upon an "industrial disease", it being said that spinal canal stenosis was a classic shearer's disease.
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate