CALL 1800 658 525


Case study: Devil in the details for factory worker

By | Uncategorized | No Comments

In July 2019, a union member contacted us with a rejected Workcover Queensland decision in relation to industrial deafness. This member had a strong work ethic and had been working in numerous factories for approximately 26 years. Due to this, he had been experiencing difficulties with his hearing. Therefore, this member consulted his doctor and it was confirmed that he had suffered a significant decrease in hearing due to his exposure to numerous factories in his work-life.

However, WorkCover denied our client’s application for compensation for industrial deafness on the basis that he did not meet the definition of ‘temporarily unemployed’ as he had been unemployed for more than six months.

We reviewed this decision in September 2019. After having lengthy conversations with this client, it was revealed that our client was battling cancer. The lengthy series of radiation treatments meant that our client was forced to take a period of time off work which lasted longer than six months.

Upon review to the Worker’s Compensation Regulator, we argued that the six-month time period was a timeframe created by WorkCover with no legal foundation. It was merely a guideline. We further argued that WorkCover failed to take into account the member’s current health condition and highlighted the fact that our client was not physically able to seek work during radiation treatment. In conclusion, numerous Queensland cases were referenced in support, and we argued our client would ordinarily be considered a worker under the Act but for his unfortunate need to seek medical treatment for his cancer.

The application was successful on review and the union member received the medical treatment for the industrial deafness he was suffering. This member was then also able to purchase the appropriate hearing aids he required, which he could not afford prior to his application for compensation being accepted.

Case study: Regulator review for union member proves fruitful

By | Uncategorized | No Comments

In October 2019, Sciacca’s Lawyers was contacted by a Union member who was suffering significant psychological distress in the workplace. This member was subject to ongoing bullying by his superiors over a number of years. However, a lot of the bullying was occurring ‘behind closed doors’ and was witnessed by very few people. This member was forced to take sick leave and a medical certificate stated that he could not return to work for a long period of time. This member proceeded to make an application to Workcover Queensland for a psychological injury, which was subsequently rejected as none of the bullying events could be substantiated, and that the actions by his superiors were found to be ‘reasonable management action’.

We reviewed this decision to the Worker’s Compensation Regulator in December 2019. During this process, we gathered numerous witness statements and sought further medical opinion in order to evidence that the nominated events had in fact taken place as described by our client. We further submitted that there was a clear breach of several workplace policies and that management had acted unreasonably.

The application for review was successful and the original decision of WorkCover Queensland was overturned. The union member was then able to access the psychological assistance they needed as well as receive weekly compensation for lost wages.

Case study: AAI Limited v Caffrey

By | Uncategorized | No Comments

We have led many landmark cases in QLD that have changed  legal precedent. We had the privilege to represent Senior Constable David Caffrey who was referred to Sciaccas Lawyers  by the Queensland Police Union. 

David suffered a significant psychiatric injury after attending a fatal road crash.

David was the first responder to a single vehicle accident where the driver, who was speeding and affected by intoxicants, had crashed into a tree. The driver was critically injured and David provided first aid and comfort. David also attempted to reassure the driver’s parents, who happened to arrive at the scene. Once paramedics arrived and cut the driver from the wreck, they advised David the man was going to die. David explained this to the driver’s parents and invited them to say goodbye to their son. 

David remained at the scene throughout the man’s passing and completed his work. The accident had a significant affect on David’s mental health. He suffered from post-traumatic stress  and was medically retired. Sciaccas brought a claim against the CTP insurer of the at fault vehicle.


Mr Caffrey sued insurer AAI for damages alleging that, as a result of the driver’s negligent driving, he had suffered these devastating psychiatric injuries. It was clear the driver had been negligent as he had been driving at an excessive speed while intoxicated by methamphetamine, amphetamine and marijuana, so that was not the dispute. The main issue at the trial and in the appeal was whether the driver owed Mr Caffrey a duty of care to avoid causing him the harm that he had suffered by attending the scene of the crash as part of his duties as a Queensland police officer. 


The court ultimately determined that the driver owed Mr Caffrey a duty of care and he was awarded $1,092,948.

If you’ve been injured, contact Sciaccas Lawyers, so that we can advise you on your rights and prospects of successfully pursuing a claim. We always recommend that you contact us as soon as possible so that we can ensure your interests are protected and you do not miss any time limits.  Feel free to contact us today on 1800 658 525.

Issues relevant to Police Officers

By | Uncategorized | No Comments

As members will be aware, Sciaccas Lawyers have provided advice to QPUE members over the previous years on a range of issues dealing with claims for compensation arising out of motor vehicle accidents, workers’ compensation reviews and common law claims. The scope of these claims have included both physical and psychological injuries.

Read More

Working Around Vehicles

By | Uncategorized | No Comments

We have recently advised an increasing number of police officers who have sustained personal injuries arising from their involvement in motor vehicle accidents. A number of those have resulted from officers being struck by motor vehicles in the course of avoiding random breath testing.

Officers will be aware that if they suffer injuries arising from a motor vehicle accident in the course of their employment they are entitled to lodge a claim with Workcover Queensland for statutory benefits pursuant to the provisions of the Workers Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 2003. What officers may not be aware of is that they are also entitled to lodge a claim against the compulsory third party (CTP) insurer of the at fault vehicle.

Read More