(With apologies to Stanley Adams and Maria Grever who wrote the song ‘What A Diff’rence A Day Made’)

On 18 October 2024, SCG notified Ambulance Tasmania that they were making a workers’ compensation claim ‘with a three page attachment setting out the events that he said had caused him to suffer psychological injury’ (State of Tasmania (Department of Health) Ambulance Tasmania v SGC [2025] TASCAT 111, [2]).  The claim form was not signed.  On the same day the Department of Health injury management co-ordinator wrote to SGC advising that they would need to receive the signature page appropriately signed.  A signed copy of page 4 was sent on 21 October 2024.  If the employer wanted to dispute liability to pay compensation they had to, within 84 days, advise the worker that liability was disputed and refer the matter to the Tasmanian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (TASCAT) (s 81A).  If the date of the claim was 18 October, Ambulance Tasmania had to act by 10 February 2025. If the date of the claim was 21 October, then they had to act by, and did act on, 13 February 2025.  The issue before TASCAT was ‘what was the effective date of the application?’  At [9]-[10] the Tribunal said:

The employer says that the claim for compensation was not made until the worker had provided the signed claim form to the employer, which was 21 October 2024. The employer says it has complied with the requirements of s 81A(1)(a), (b) and (c) within the permitted 84 days, and the Tribunal has jurisdiction to hear and determine the employer’s s 81A referral.

The worker says the claim for compensation was made on the day the unsigned claim form and initial certificate were given to the employer, that is on 18 October 2024. If that is correct, then the employer has not given notice of the dispute or filed the referral within the 84 days permitted by s 81A and the Tribunal has no jurisdiction to hear the s 81A referral.

The Tribunal agreed with the worker.  The Workers Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988 (Tas) s 34 sets out what must be in the application but goes onto say, at s 34(3)

A defect, omission, or irregularity in a claim for compensation or a medical certificate under subsection (1)(b) shall not affect the validity of the claim and the claim shall be dealt with in accordance with this Part unless the defect, omission, or irregularity relates to information which is not within the knowledge of, or reasonably ascertainable by, the employer or his licensed insurer.

Tribunal Senior Member Jack accepted that the WorkCover Board (that authorised the claim form) intended that the signature was essential. This was evidenced by instructions on the form that a claim could not proceed without signature.  But the legislation is paramount and in the event of an inconsistency between the Act and the procedures prescribed by the Board, it is the Act that must prevail.  And the Act, as 34(3) says that ‘A defect, omission, or irregularity in a claim for compensation…’ does not affect the validity of the claim (see [24]-[25]).  Substantial compliance with the form is sufficient ([26]).   At [28] Senior Member Jack said ‘I find that the worker, in giving his employer the unsigned claim form and medical certificate, substantially complied with the requirements of s 34(1) of the Act’.

Conclusion

The effective date of the application was 18 October 2024.  If the employer wanted to dispute liability it had to do so by 10 February 2025 and it did not.  That meant the Tribunal did not have the jurisdiction to entertain Ambulance Tasmania’s objection to liability.  Whilst not expressly stated in the judgment I infer that given the objection was out of time, the employer failed to dispute liability ‘in accordance with section 81A’ and is therefore ‘taken to have accepted liability in respect of that claim’ (s 81AB).

This blog is made possible with generous financial support from (in alphabetical order) the Australasian College of Paramedicine, the Australian Paramedics Association (NSW), the Australian Paramedics Association (Qld), Natural Hazards Research Australia, NSW Rural Fire Service Association and the NSW SES Volunteers Association. I am responsible for the content in this post including any errors or omissions. Any opinions expressed are mine, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion or understanding of the donors.

This blog is a general discussion of legal principles only.  It is not legal advice. Do not rely on the information here to make decisions regarding your legal position or to make decisions that affect your legal rights or responsibilities. For advice on your particular circumstances always consult an admitted legal practitioner in your state or territory.