Ahmadi v Victorian WorkCover Authority [2025] VCC 1459

"... [D]isentangling psychiatric and physical, and disentangling consequences of back and hip. We say that it's not a serious injury for pain and suffering purposes, that is the range is insufficient, and we say that economic loss is heavily contested, the plaintiff has capacity to earn at least 60 per cent of his pre-injury earnings."

1. Counsel for the VWA also identified that causation, and permanence, of the claimed left hip injury was in issue.
2. The issues for determination are:

(a) What impairment consequences does Mr Ahmadi claim as a result of his lumbar spine condition?

(b) Is there a substantial organic basis for Mr Ahmadi's claimed lumbar spine impairment consequences?

(c) If (b) cannot be answered "yes", can Mr Ahmadi's organic impairment consequences be separated from those referable to a psychological or non-organic response?

(d) Is Mr Ahmadi permanently unable to earn at least 60 per cent of his "without injury" earnings because of the impairment consequences of the compensable lumbar spine injury?

(e) Is the loss of earning capacity consequence of Mr Ahmadi's compensable lumbar spine injury "serious"?

(f) Are Mr Ahmadi's claimed lumbar spine impairment consequences "serious"?

1. For the reasons that follow, Mr Ahmadi is granted leave to seek loss of earning capacity damages for his compensable lumbar spine injury. Such leave also entitles Mr Ahmadi to claim pain and suffering damages.

1. The following, I believe, are non-controversial matters. As far as any were contested, these represent my findings unless otherwise stated.
2. Mr Ahmadi was born and brought up in Tehran, Iran. He completed his secondary schooling and started, but did not finish, a degree in Agricultural Engineering.
3. For about two years, Mr Ahmadi operated a jewellery store in a small shopping centre in Tehran. He employed three full-time staff.
4. In 2009, Mr Ahmadi came to Australia as a refugee. His first employment in Australia was as a painter. He completed a Certificate III in Commercial Painting.
5. In around February 2015, Mr Ahmadi began working for Victoria Police as a PSO. He was required to wear a vest and an equipment belt for the performance of his duties. Mr Ahmadi said that his vest did not fit him well and he found it uncomfortable. Up until 2020, Mr Ahmadi's duties primarily involved patrolling train stations. In the context of the COVID-19 restrictions in Victoria, Mr Ahmadi's duties changed somewhat in 2020 and 2021. He was required to patrol streets and shopping centres, and said he spent much more time on his feet.
6. In December 2020, Mr Ahmadi was promoted to the rank of sergeant.
7. Mr Ahmadi experienced short episodes of low back pain in May 2016, October 2016, August 2017 and March 2019.
8. From mid-2020, Mr Ahmadi began to experience pain in in his lower back at the end of his shifts. He consulted his general practitioner ("GP"), Dr Quoc-Tuan Dinh at Premium Care Medical Centre, and was prescribed Diclofenac. Mr Ahmadi continued to work.
9. In mid-2022, Mr Ahmadi's marriage broke down, and his wife moved out of their former matrimonial home. They have since divorced.
10. Also in mid-2022, Mr Ahmadi's lower back symptoms deteriorated. He began to experience constant pain in his lower back, and pain and pins and needles in his right leg. Mr Ahmadi consulted his GP in October 2022. He was referred for a CT scan of his lumbar spine, prescribed Mobic and also referred to Dr Symon McCallum, pain specialist. He was additionally referred for psychiatric counselling.
11. Mr Ahmadi stopped performing his pre-injury duties in October 2022.
12. In late 2022, Mr Ahmadi unsuccessfully attempted a return to work on two occasions performing administrative duties. He ceased work completely on 8 January 2023, and has not worked since. His employment was terminated in July 2025.
13. In November 2022, he submitted two Worker's Injury Claim Forms, one for a lower back injury, and one for psychiatric injury. His claim in respect of the lower back injury was accepted.
14. In July 2024, the authorised insurer accepted Mr Ahmadi's impairment benefit claim for his lower back and left hip injuries.
15. Mr Ahmadi said that prior to October 2022, he experienced some symptoms of pain in his left hip and groin, but those symptoms deteriorated in the months after he ceased work. He believes that the problem in his left hip was due to stress placed on his left leg to compensate for his right leg symptoms.
16. Mr Ahmadi's lower back and left hip conditions have been treated conservatively. In addition to consulting Dr McCallum, he has consulted Dr Richard Sullivan, pain physician; Dr Viral Shah, orthopaedic surgeon, and Mr Philip Sheard, orthopaedic surgeon. He had physiotherapy treatment until early 2025. He is currently prescribed Mersyndol Forte, Norgesic and Naprosyn for pain, which he takes about four days a week.
17. Mr Ahmadi moved out of his former matrimonial home in late 2024. He presently spends most of his time staying with his partner in Bali. When in Melbourne, Mr Ahmadi lives with his brother and sister-in-law in Maidstone.

What impairment consequences does Mr Ahmadi claim as a result of his lumbar spine condition?

1. Mr Ahmadi relied upon two affidavits affirmed by him on 28 October 2024 and 5 September 2025. He deposed to the following impairment consequences:

(a) Constant pain in his lower back, particularly on the right side and into his right buttock. The pain is a constant ache with occasional sharp stabbing pains;

(b) Occasional pins and needles down his right leg and into the fourth and fifth toes of his right foot;

(c) Constant pain in the left hip and groin area;

(d) Occasional pins and needles down into the third, fourth and fifth toes of his left foot;

(e) Disturbed sleep each night due to lower back and left hip pain. He tends to only get four or five hours of broken sleep each night which leaves him constantly exhausted;

(f) His lower back and left hip and groin symptoms worsen if he sits, stands or walks for more than twenty minutes. He avoids driving for more than thirty minutes;

(g) He struggles to perform domestic chores such as sweeping and washing-up, and struggles to bend;

(h) He is no longer able to play soccer, go camping, or pursue street photography. He re-homed his dog as he struggled to walk him;

(i) Physical intimacy with his partner is reduced due to his pain and restrictions.

(a) He does not intend to undergo any surgery for his lower back or left hip conditions as he is concerned at possible complications;

(b) His pain specialist has offered to perform a further injection in a different location, but he has declined as he is afraid to do so, and the previous injection was not helpful;

(c) His relationship with his partner has progressed despite the intimacy problems caused by his injuries;

(d) He agreed he received weekly payments until about March 2025. Thereafter he was approved for a permanent disability pension from ESSSuper;

(e) He has not applied for work;

(f) He hopes to bring his partner to Australia;

(g) He agreed that both his lower back and left hip each cause him considerable trouble;

(h) He accepted he sold his photographic equipment because of financial problems but maintained that he did so because he was no longer able to pursue photography;

(i) He accepted that he had the intellectual capacity to work as a customer service officer, infringement officer and disability support worker but doubted his ability to consistently and reliably perform the physical aspects of each role given his functional limitations, lack of sleep and medication use. He said he had a sit/stand desk during his attempted return to work, and it did not help.

1. Mr Ahmadi also relied upon an affidavit affirmed by his brother, Daniel Ahmadi, on 10 September 2025, and an affidavit from his partner, Ayu Saleh, affirmed on 12 September 2025. The VWA did not seek leave to cross-examine them.
2. Daniel Ahmadi's affidavit was cast in broad terms. He deposed to a significant change in his brother's personality from late 2022. He observed his brother changing posture or shifting his weight regularly when sitting and believed this was due to back pain. He noted that his brother no longer exercised or socialised as he used to and struggled to walk for as long as he used to.
3. Ayu Saleh deposed to first meeting Mr Ahmadi in Bali in 2020. They became romantically involved in July 2022. At that time, Ms Saleh noted Mr Ahmadi was less active than he had been, and appeared to be restless and uncomfortable in bed. Ms Saleh deposed that Mr Ahmadi usually spends two days in bed recovering from the flight between Melbourne and Bali. They no longer go for walks or swim at the beach as they had done previously. Ms Saleh observed Mr Ahmadi change posture and shift his weight frequently when sitting, and tossing and turning and struggling to sleep. She believes this is due to pain and discomfort. Ms Saleh deposed that their sex life had changed dramatically.

Is there a substantial organic basis for Mr Ahmadi's claimed lumbar spine impairment consequences?

1. This is a convenient point at which to consider the medical evidence tendered by the parties.

1. On 7 October 2022, Mr Ahmadi had a CT scan of his lumbar spine. This was reported to show:[2]

"Minor L3-4 and L4-5 lumbar canal stenosis secondary to a diffuse disc bulge at both levels. If clinical suspicion of nerve root impingement is high then MRI of the lumbar spine would be indicated.

Mild lower lumbar spondylosis and mild-to-moderate bilateral L4-5 and L5‑S1 facet joint osteoarthritis. Low-dose helical CT guided facet joint steroid injections may be of therapeutic benefit."

1. On 12 November 2022, Mr Ahmadi had an MRI scan of his lumbosacral spine. This was reported to reveal:[3]

"No obvious cause for back pain identified. Small Schmorl's nodes identified at T12-L1, L1-2, L2-3 and L3-4 disc levels consistent with background of variant Schuerman's disease.

No evidence of disc herniation or nerve root impingement at any level. Disc height and disc signal normal.

1. On 25 September 2023, Mr Ahmadi underwent a further MRI scan of his lumbar spine and an MRI scan of his left hip. The reports revealed there was no significant pathology in the lumbar spine. In the left hip, features of CAM morphology with chondropathy affecting the superior acetabular rim were noted.[4]
2. On 10 September 2025, an MRI scan of Mr Ahmadi's lumbar spine was reported to reveal multilevel endplate Schmorl's nodes, no significant intervertebral disc disease, and an otherwise normal appearance. The reporting radiologist noted that no cause was demonstrated for Mr Ahmadi's symptoms.[5]
3. On 18 September 2025, Mr Ahmadi underwent an x-ray of his pelvis and left hip. The reported findings of the x-ray were:[6]

"The left hip joint is mild to moderately narrowed. There are periarticular osteophytic lipping. The articular margins are smooth. No fracture or suspicious lesion across the hip. No fracture or suspicious lesion in the pelvic bones. Preserved sacroiliac and pubic symphyseal joints.

Appearances consistent with mild-to-moderate hip osteoarthritis."

1. Mr Ahmadi also underwent a bone scan on 18 September 2025. This was reported to reveal no focal abnormality in the lumbar disc, lumbar facet joints, sacroiliac joints or in the hip joints.[7]

1. Two reports were tendered from Dr McCallum, dated 21 October 2022 and 24 November 2022. Dr McCallum saw Mr Ahmadi on each of those dates.
2. In his first report, Dr McCallum noted Mr Ahmadi was complaining of right-sided lower back and right leg pain for about two years, caused by performing foot patrols. Dr McCallum noted Mr Ahmadi was seeing a psychologist and psychiatrist, and that he had been diagnosed with depression. Mr Ahmadi reported that walking a long way hurt, he had not run, sitting increased his pain, and walking was better than standing.
3. Dr McCallum opined that a CT scan dated 10 July 2022 revealed minor canal stenosis, disc bulges and facet arthropathy at L4 to S1.
4. On examination, Dr McCallum noted:[8]

"... [N]ormal reflexes, power and sensation to pinprick in his lower limbs and saddle area ... no pain to palpation in the right heel.

Lumbar flexion 100°, extension rotation increased the pain. ... hips are normal. ... negative sacroiliac joint pain.

... tender to palpation in the lower lumbar spine, possibly the upper pelvis."

1. Dr McCalllum opined that the central lower back pain may be discogenic or facet joint related, Mr Ahmadi may have sacroiliac joint pain. He said there was a muscular component. Dr McCallum ordered an MRI scan of Mr Ahmadi's lumbar spine, ordered blood tests to see if he had ankylosing spondylitis, recommended physiotherapy and prescribed Norflex. He indicated that Mr Ahmadi was possibly a candidate for nerve conduction studies, diagnostic medial branch blocks, and an appointment with a neurosurgeon.
2. When Mr McCallum reviewed Mr Ahmadi four weeks later, he noted the findings of the MRI scan were essentially normal. He recommended that Mr Ahmadi return to work as tolerated, have physiotherapy, and have an ultrasound of his right heel (noting he had plantar fasciitis). He advised Mr Ahmadi to keep walking on a daily basis. Dr McCallum indicated that he wished to review Mr Ahmadi in six weeks. It is not clear whether this happened. No further report was tendered from Dr McCallum.

1. A report was tendered from Dr Navani dated 17 February 2023.
2. Dr Navani has been Mr Ahmadi's GP since 3 November 2022 (Mr Ahmadi had to change GPs as his previous GP did not see WorkCover patients).
3. Dr Navani diagnosed an aggravation of lumbar spondylosis with spinal canal stenosis at L3-4 and L4-5 with lumbar disc bulge. He said there was a clear history and relationship between Mr Ahmadi's back condition and his duties of constant patrolling with heavy equipment. He opined that Mr Ahmadi had no work capacity.

1. Two reports were tendered from Dr Sullivan, dated 22 November 2024 and 18 March 2025. Mr Ahmadi first attended Dr Sullivan in September 2023. He has seen him on several occasions since, and continues to see him.
2. In the November 2024 report, Dr Sullivan noted that Mr Ahmadi should be engaging regularly with his physiotherapist, and ought to have a gym swim program to assist his functional capacity. Dr Sullivan noted that Mr Ahmadi was taking Mersyndol Forte and Norgesic. He prescribed orphenadrine and naproxen as alternatives. He opined:[9]

"... It is important to point out that his clinical condition can be considered stable and stationary, no further meaningful improvement is anticipated and he is not in a position to return to work."

1. Dr Sullivan's report dated 18 March 2025 was written for the purpose of a total and permanent disablement claim. Dr Sullivan noted that Mr Ahmadi presented with lower back pain, predominantly on the right side with associated right-sided gluteal pain and lower limb pain. The pain was progressive in nature and was impacting upon his work capacity, recreational and social activities. He noted that Mr Ahmadi had functional restrictions of around 20-30 minutes in static postures and walking. Dr Sullivan noted that radiological investigations did not show "substantive pathological deterioration aside from an evident cam lesion of the left hip".[10] He further opined:[11]

"Despite this, he has substantive and persisting functional restrictions resulting from injuries in the workplace, precipitating onset of his organic pain condition (chronic post-traumatic pain of the lower back and left lower limb). He cannot work and has no meaningful prospects for return to work in his pre-injury capacity.

... your client has undergone all reasonable medical and other examinations requested of him.

... [He] has reached maximum medical improvement.

... [He] has undergone all reasonable and necessary rehabilitation plans and programmes.

... [He] continues to have intractable pain of an organic nature resulting from his injuries. His injuries preclude him from returning to employment. ... ."

1. A report was tendered from Dr Shah dated 18 October 2023. Dr Shah examined Mr Ahmadi that day upon referral from Dr Sullivan regarding his left hip pain.
2. Dr Shah noted a history of left hip pain for four months. Mr Ahmadi told him that he had developed lower back and right leg pain eighteen months previously, and started favouring his left leg, as putting weight on his right leg caused worsening pain. Subsequently, he developed constant groin pain.
3. On examination, Dr Shah noted tenderness in the groin, and a positive FADIR test. There was no pain on abduction and external rotation, and a good range of movement of the hip joint.
4. Dr Shah noted the MRI of the hip showed a bony prominence at the superior junction of the femoral head and neck, producing a CAM morphology with associated chondropathy at the superior aspect of the limb, but very subtle changes in the labrum.
5. Dr Shah recommended that Mr Ahmadi continue with conservative management. He noted that he was due to have a left sacroiliac joint and S1 nerve root injection with Dr Sullivan. If that did not ease his symptoms, he suggested the next option was a CT-guided cortisone injection to his left hip.

Mr Philip Sheard, orthopaedic and spinal surgeon

1. Two reports were tendered from Mr Sheard, dated 11 September 2025 and 24 September 2025. Mr Sheard examined Mr Ahmadi on each of those dates.
2. In his first report, Mr Sheard set out the history of injury. He noted:[12]

"... [H]e is tender over the right L5-S1 region, reduced range of movement of the lumbar spine, Trendelenburg negative. Normal neurology. X-ray of his left hip shows pain with internal rotation. MRI scan is essentially normal. ... ."

1. Mr Sheard arranged x-rays of the pelvis and left hip along with a SPECT/CT scan of Mr Ahmadi's lumbar spine and hips.
2. On review on 24 September 2025, Mr Sheard noted that the x-ray of the left hip showed increased sclerosis and some joint space narrowing. He described the SPECT/CT as "quiescent".[13]
3. Mr Sheard said that he offered Mr Ahmadi a local anaesthetic diagnostic injection to his left hip joint, "as he does not have marked osteoarthritis on his x-ray. This is to assess how much pain is coming from the hip joint. He is not sure about hip replacement."[14]

1. A report was tendered from Dr Ghoniem dated 13 October 2022. Dr Ghoniem examined Mr Ahmadi on 12 October 2022. The report was tendered by the VWA as the history recorded by Dr Ghoniem was put to Mr Ahmadi during cross-examination.

1. A report was tendered from Dr Chow dated 5 June 2024. Dr Chow assessed Mr Ahmadi for the purpose of his impairment benefit claim.
2. Dr Chow noted the reported history of onset of the lower back pain, followed by left hip pain:[15]

"... around early 2023 due to the need to compensate for his right lower back pain. His left hip pain was located in the groin region with constant pins and needles to the lateral foot and lateral toes."

1. Dr Chow noted that Mr Ahmadi was due to start a pain management program in July 2024.
2. On examination, Dr Chow noted a normal gait:[16]

On examination, there was no obvious deformity, swelling or colour change noted in the lumbar spine.

Tenderness was elicited in a banding distribution on the right side, at the level of L3-5, radiating into the right gluteal region.

On neurological examination, paraesthesia was noted in the dorsal aspect of the left third to fifth toes and the lateral foot. Paraesthesia was noted on the dorsal aspect of the right third and fifth toes. Normal power, tone and reflexes were present bilaterally.

On examination, no obvious deformity, swelling or colour change was noted in the left or right hip. Reduced active range of movement was noted in internal rotation and adduction on the right compared to the left."

1. Under the heading Diagnoses, Dr Chow stated:[17]

"Mr Ahmadi is a 40-year-old male with reported non-specific lower back pain and left hip CAM impingement as a result of his work duties. His condition was managed non-surgically.

In terms of his lumbar spine, Mr Ahmadi reported pain at rest, which is worse with movement. In terms of his left hip, he reported pain at rest, which is worsened with movements such as hip adduction, external rotation and twisting movements of his lumbar spine. Functionally, he has difficulties with walking, standing and sitting for prolonged periods of time.

In my opinion, Mr Ahmadi continues to experience symptoms relevant to his alleged injury."

1. Dr Chow opined that Mr Ahmadi had reached maximum functional capacity, "his condition does affect his activities of daily living and his ability to work".[18]

1. Two reports were tendered from Dr Yong, dated 22 May 2025 and 24 July 2025. Dr Yong examined Mr Ahmadi on 22 May 2025.
2. Dr Yong noted the circumstances in which Mr Ahmadi reported suffering his lower back condition. He reported noticing the onset of left hip pain around 2022. He told Dr Yong that his right-sided lower back pain caused him to lean towards the left when sitting, lying or standing. Dr Yong noted that Mr Ahmadi underwent a left sacroiliac joint block and left S1 nerve root injection on 31 October 2023, for the diagnosis of left-sided hip, groin and lower limb pain.
3. Mr Ahmadi reported being equally troubled by his lower back and left hip condition. He reported side effects from his medications including drowsiness, grogginess, reduced memory and focus. He reported Naprosyn gave him diarrhoea.
4. Mr Ahmadi reported a 20-minute, sitting, standing, walking, driving tolerance.
5. On examination, Dr Yong noted:[19]

"... [He] walked with a slow but non-antalgic gait. He was sitting and standing during the consultation. He was able to tiptoe and heel stand. Partial squatting and kneeling led to increasing pain in his left hip.

... there was tenderness on palpation in the lower back more on the right and in the midline.

Range of movement of the lumbar spine was 50° flexion, 10° extension, 10° lateral flexion and 20° rotation. The straight leg raise was 40° bilaterally.

The neurological examination of the legs revealed no sensory loss. The knee and ankle reflexes were normal. The tone in both legs was normal and symmetrical. The power was normal in both toes, ankles and knees.

On examination of the left hip, there was tenderness to palpation anteriorly and in the left groin. There was no tenderness over the greater trochanter or with springing of the hips.

The Thomas and Trendelenburg's (sic) test[s] were negative. The leg lengths were equal.

Range of movement of the left hip was 90° flexion, 20° extension, 10° abduction, 10° adduction, 30° external rotation and 10° internal rotation. It was tender with internal rotation and adduction. The power was reduced."

1. Dr Yong diagnosed a lumbosacral spine soft tissue injury, with persisting lumbosacral dysfunction and radicular symptoms, and a left hip soft tissue injury, with persisting left hip dysfunction. He opined that his conditions were complicated by a psychological comorbidity.
2. Dr Yong was of the view that both the lower back and left hip conditions had stabilised. He recommended active physical therapy modalities whilst avoiding aggravating factors.
3. Dr Yong then considered the impact the lower back and left hip conditions each had separately upon Mr Ahmadi's capacity to work. He opined that each condition separately rendered Mr Ahmadi incapable of returning to his pre-injury duties as a PSO. He opined that the incapacity was permanent.
4. Dr Yong opined that given Mr Ahmadi's functional restrictions by reason of his lower back condition, and the definition of "suitable employment", he was unfit for suitable employment. Dr Yong was separately of the same opinion with regard to the left hip condition.
5. Dr Yong was subsequently provided with further material and asked to provide a supplementary report. The additional material included a Nabenet Suitable Employment Report dated 5 May 2025 which suggested a number of roles including, relevantly, customer service officer, infringement notice officer and disability care worker.
6. Dr Yong considered the suitability of each role in light of Mr Ahmadi's lumbar spine condition and left hip condition separately. He opined that the role of customer service officer was not suitable employment, primarily because of the sitting requirements. He said the patrolling duties and standing required of an infringement notice officer would exceed Mr Ahmadi's functional tolerances. The requirement to perform domestic tasks, personal care duties and pushing clients in wheelchairs required of a disability care worker would exceed Mr Ahmadi's restrictions.

1. Two reports were tendered from Dr Akil, dated 16 May 2025 and 11 September 2025. Dr Akil examined Mr Ahmadi on 16 May 2025.
2. Dr Akil noted the history that Mr Ahmadi's pain "initially manifested in his right lower back and subsequently developed in his left hip as he began compensating by leaning, sitting and standing predominantly on his left side."[20]
3. On examination, Dr Akil observed a normal gait. Forward flexion was limited to hands reaching just above knee level. Extension was limited to approximately 5 degrees. Straight leg raising was limited to 30 degrees on the right and 45 degrees on the left. There was normal power in hip flexion and extension bilaterally. Knee flexion and extension, ankle dorsiflexion and plantar flexion strength were normal bilaterally. Knee and ankle reflexes were normal. Dr Akil observed Mr Ahmadi's "movements were guarded and he appeared to be in discomfort throughout the examination, particularly when changing positions".[21]
4. Under the heading Diagnosis, Dr Akil opined:[22]

"Based on the history, examination findings, and investigations, Mr Ahmadi is suffering from aggravation of lumbar spondylosis. This is consistent with a cumulative workplace requirement related to prolonged walking while carrying heavy equipment during his employment as a PSO.

On the balance of probabilities, both conditions are causally related to his occupational duties as a PSO, particularly the intensified patrol duties during the COVID period in 2021."

1. Dr Akil opined that the prognosis was guarded. The condition had substantially stabilised.
2. As to work capacity, Dr Akil said:[23]

"Mr Ahmadi has been unable to work since February 2023, following a period of modified duties from October 2022 to February 2023. His current condition significantly impairs his capacity to perform the essential duties of a PSO, which require prolonged standing, walking and the ability to wear heavy equipment. Even modified office-based duties proved challenging due to his inability to maintain a seated position for more than 20-30 minutes. His need to constantly change positions to manage pain would make sustained employment in most roles difficult. Based on his current presentation, he is unlikely to be able to return to his pre-injury role as a PSO. Any potential future employment would need to accommodate his significant physical limitations, including the ability to change positions frequently, avoid prolonged sitting or standing, and avoid bending or twisting movements. A comprehensive occupational assessment would be beneficial to identify any potential suitable employment options, but his prospects appear limited given the severity and persistence of his current symptoms."

1. Dr Akil was subsequently provided with reports from Dr Reza Sabetghadam, occupational physician, and Mr Michael Dooley, orthopaedic surgeon, and the Nabenet Suitable Employment Report dated 5 May 2025.
2. Dr Akil said that he agreed with Mr Dooley's opinion that a vest weighing 15 kilograms associated with Mr Ahmadi's work activities "will result in worsening back pain especially when there is some background of lumbar degeneration." He said Dr Sabetghadam's opinion to the contrary was in contrast with the many biomechanical studies. Dr Akil did not alter his diagnosis and prognosis.
3. Dr Akil maintained his views as to Mr Ahmadi's functional restrictions, and suggested that any further details about suitable employment would require assessment by an occupational physician.

1. Three reports were tendered from Mr Dooley, dated 28 November 2024, 8 July 2025 and 9 September 2025. Mr Dooley examined Mr Ahmadi on 26 November 2024 and 7 July 2025.
2. On examination on the first occasion, Mr Dooley noted Mr Ahmadi walked without a limp. There was generalised tenderness in the low lumbar region. Flexion was to 50 degrees, extension to 15 degrees, and lateral flexion and rotation to the left and right were to 25 degrees. Straight leg raising was 20 degrees on both sides, associated with complaints of significant low back pain. Power, tone, sensation and reflexes were intact in the lower limbs. Examination of the hips was said to be "difficult". On distraction, there was a good range of rotation of both hips.
3. Mr Dooley opined that Mr Ahmadi had mild, naturally occurring and age-related degenerative disc change involving the lower lumbar region. He accepted it was possible that prolonged walking with a heavy-equipment vest could precipitate some low back pain. Mr Dooley opined that the CAM morphology is a not uncommon radiological finding in asymptomatic patients. He added "I do not believe that it explains the pain that Mr Ahmadi describes in the region of his left groin/testicle".[24]
4. Mr Dooley noted there were inconsistent signs on examination. He added:[25]

"... Accepting that Mr Ahmadi may have aggravated underlying degenerative disc change involving his lumbar spine, during the course of his work, it is my view that the constancy and intensity of his ongoing pain and described disability are far greater than one would expect to see for his organic condition. I believe that Mr Ahmadi has had a psychological reaction to his situation and that this reaction dominates his clinical presentation. ... For his overall wellbeing, it is imperative that Mr Ahmadi returns to suitable work in time.

From an orthopaedic point of view only, I would expect Mr Ahmadi to note some intermittent low back pain. I would have expected him to have been able to engage in a wide range of employment, domestic and leisure activities."

1. Mr Dooley's findings on examination of Mr Ahmadi on the second occasion were similar to the first. His diagnosis, clinical impression and opinion remained much the same.
2. Mr Dooley was asked further questions on the issue of whether wearing the vest and equipment was related to Mr Ahmadi's condition. Once again, Mr Dooley opined:[26]

"I would accept that, at times, walking long distances with a weight of 15 kilos around ones chest, abdominal and thoracolumbar region, could lead to some lower back pain being experienced, especially in people with underlying degenerative disc change. ... ."

1. As to Mr Ahmadi's occupational restrictions, Mr Dooley said:[27]

"From an orthopaedic point of view only, I believe that Mr Ahmadi would not be able to carry out regular heavy physical work or work that involved a lot of bending, lifting and manoeuvring. I believe that he has a physical capacity to carry out a wide range of light physical work and clerical type work. Taking into account the above restrictions, I believe that he has a physical capacity to undertake full-time work."

1. Mr Dooley was asked to provide a supplementary report addressing causation issues relevant to the vest, equipment and walking. He expanded upon his previously expressed opinions in his second supplementary report dated 9 September 2025.

1. Two reports were tendered from Dr Sabetghadam, dated 9 January 2025 and 12 July 2025. Dr Sabetghadam examined Mr Ahmadi on 8 January 2025 and 3 July 2025.
2. On examination on the first occasion, Dr Sabetghadam relevantly noted:[28]

... well-developed musculoskeletal structures in his lower limbs. There was no discrepancy between the right and left leg. He managed to walk on his toes and heels and demonstrated unilateral weight-bearing without significant difficulty. He sat on the edge of the examination table and placed his left ankle over the right knee and his right ankle over the left knee without significant difficulty. He performed a squat without significant difficulty.

On deep palpation of the lumbosacral spine, Mr Ahmadi complained of tenderness over the L4/L5 and L5/S1 levels, mostly on the left side.

Range of motion of the lumbosacral spine was unremarkable and symmetrical.

Seated straight leg raising test was unremarkable. However, in supine position, Mr Ahmadi complained of pain in the left groin after flexing his left hip above 70 degrees. Axial loading was negative. Trunk twisting while standing was negative.

On sensory examination of the lower limbs, Mr Ahmadi complained of sensory alteration in the L5 dermatome of the left leg.

On motor examination of the lower limbs, the adductors of the left hip were weaker than those of the right hip.

Reflexes examination of the lower limbs was unremarkable and symmetrical.

The range of motion of the hips was unremarkable, although Mr Ahmadi complained of pain during internal rotation of the left hip.

1. Dr Sabetghadam opined that Mr Ahmadi had the capacity to work full time performing modified duties. He said there was insufficient data in the medical literature to support that Mr Ahmadi was at risk of development and/or aggravation of his non-specific lower back pain and non-verifiable radicular-type pain if he were to participate in his pre-injury duties. He opined that his pre-injury duties would place him at risk of exacerbating his symptoms of femoroacetabular impingement on the left side.
2. Dr Sabetghadam stated that he had not elicited significant objective evidence of limited physical capacity apart from subjective pain which he opined was "reinforced by some psychosocial factors".[29] He opined that Mr Ahmadi's poor tolerance was "believable to some degree" and noted that it could vary day to day.[30]
3. Dr Sabetghadam recommended the following modifications relating to Mr Ahmadi's lower back condition:[31]

"1. Modification of lifting and carrying heavy loads, the weight of the load to be determined by his tolerance and could be different on a day-to-day basis depending on how he feels and how active he is.

1. Modification of pushing and pulling heavy loads, the weight of the load to be determined by his tolerance and could be different on a da-to-day basis depending on how he feels and how active he is.
2. Modification of frequent bending and working in awkward postures.
3. Modification of prolonged sitting, standing and walking, the length of period to be determined by his tolerance and could be different on a day-to-day basis depending on how he feels and how active he is."

1. Relevant to the roles upon which the VWA relied in this proceeding, Dr Sabetghadam opined that Mr Ahmadi was fit to work full time as a customer service officer, infringement notice officer and disability care worker.
2. Dr Sabetghadam re-examined Mr Ahmadi on 3 July 2025. On this occasion, Dr Sabetghadam noted inconsistencies between the formal and informal examinations. The differences in examination findings on this occasion were:

(a) Mr Ahmadi did not squat, stating it caused pain - previously, Mr Ahmadi performed a squat without significant difficulty;

(b) Light palpation of the lumbosacral spine caused diffuse non-specific tenderness - previously there was L4-5 and L5-S1 tenderness on deep palpation;

(c) Axial loading was positive - previously negative;

(d) Trunk twisting while standing was positive - previously negative;

(e) Mr Ahmadi reported sensory alteration on the lateral aspect of the right foot - previously it was the L5 dermatome of the left leg;

(f) No signs of weakness in the hip musculature - previously, the adductors of the left hip were weaker.

1. Dr Sabetghadam concluded that there were strongly positive Waddell's signs for simulation, distraction, regional sensory change and tenderness.
2. Dr Sabetghadam opined that wearing a police vest did not contribute to any of Mr Ahmadi's current medical conditions on the scale of medical probabilities.
3. Dr Sabetghadam maintained his views regarding work capacity and repeated that "consideration should be given to the restrictions, limitations and modifications listed in my original report".[32] He opined that Mr Ahmadi was capable of negotiating the flexibility required to accommodate modifications required by his tolerance. Dr Sabetghadam further opined that Mr Ahmadi's perception about his difficulty working appeared to be largely psychosocial, and there was "evidence of catastrophising regarding his heightened pain and disability perception and poor tolerance and medical condition of his lower back and hip".[33]

1. A report was tendered from Dr Rathnayake dated 1 December 2022. Dr Rathnayake examined Mr Ahmadi that day. The report was tendered by the VWA as part of the history reportedly given by Mr Ahmadi put to him during cross-examination.

1. A report was tendered from Dr Sheenan dated 24 June 2024. Dr Sheenan examined Mr Ahmadi that day. The report was tendered by the VWA as part of the history given by Mr Ahmadi put to him during cross-examination.

1. In Meadows v Lichmore Pty Ltd,[34] Maxwell ACJ approved a two-step approach to disentangle physical and psychological pain and suffering consequences.
2. The first step is to ask if there is a substantial organic basis for the pain and suffering consequences relied upon.
3. I bear in mind the observations of the Court of Appeal in Findlay v Transport Accident Commission:[35]

"... [A] serious injury application is a 'gateway' proceeding, usually conducted with no oral evidence other than that of the plaintiff. The result of the application does not give rise to any liability to pay damages. Nor does it create any relevant issue estoppel. This Court has previously held that a plaintiff in a serious injury application must prove causation. However, the question, whether the evidence tendered in such a gateway application is sufficient for that purpose, needs to be considered in light of the limited purpose for which the question is being asked, and in light of the more limited scope of the evidence adduced on that issue than that which might be adduced in a full trial."

1. I accept the opinions of Dr Akil and Mr Dooley that wearing a vest and equipment-belt weighing about 15 kilograms in the course of performing the duties of a PSO could aggravate pre-existing lumbar spondylosis. I prefer their opinions on that issue to the opinion of Dr Sabetghadam, given their specialities. Further, Mr Dooley gave more detailed consideration to, and explanation of, the issue.
2. I find that Mr Ahmadi suffered an aggravation injury to his lumbar spine, in that previously minimally symptomatic lumbar spondylosis was rendered symptomatic in the course of his employment as a PSO.
3. There is no clear and reasoned medical opinion attributing the onset of Mr Ahmadi's left hip and groin issues to his lumbar spine and right leg condition.
4. Mr Ahmadi has consistently reported to doctors his belief that in the context of protecting his right leg and lower back, he placed strain on his left leg which caused the left hip and groin symptoms. None of the treating or medico-legal practitioners has explicitly discounted that possible causal link.
5. Mr Dooley said that CAM morphology in the hip is a common finding in asymptomatic persons. He indicated that the findings on radiology did not explain Mr Ahmadi's left hip and groin pain, but Mr Dooley did not sufficiently explain why this was so.
6. The very recent imaging of Mr Ahmadi's left hip, and the opinion of Mr Sheard, was that there is increased sclerosis and some joint space narrowing. Mr Sheard has offered a left hip injection and discussed hip replacement.
7. On balance, I am sufficiently satisfied that the aggravation injury to Mr Ahmadi's left hip and groin was due to overcompensating because of his lower back and right leg injury. I make that finding based on the timing of the onset of symptoms, and noting that Mr Ahmadi's contention regarding the causal link appears to have been implicitly accepted by his treating doctors.
8. Doing the best I can on the medical evidence, the hip injury is best described as an aggravation of degenerative change.
9. For the purpose of this application, the impairment consequences of the left hip and groin condition are consequential upon the compensable lower back injury.
10. I am satisfied that there is a substantial organic basis for Mr Ahmadi's claimed lumbar spine and left hip impairment consequences. I prefer the opinions of the treating practitioners, and, in particular, Dr Sullivan on this issue. Dr Sullivan has had the benefit of examining Mr Ahmadi on a number of occasions since 2023. I further note that Mr Ahmadi's description of his pain and functional limitations in his affidavits and to the treating and medico-legal practitioners has been generally consistent over time. Dr Sabetghadam's finding of significant Waddell's signs in his second examination is an outlier. Although Mr Dooley opined that Mr Ahmadi's symptoms were at a higher level than one might expect given the radiology, he did not suggest that they could not or should not be accepted.
11. As I have found that there is a substantial organic basis for Mr Ahmadi's claimed impairment consequences, there is no need for me to consider the second step of the test in Meadows v Lichmore.[36]

Is Mr Ahmadi permanently unable to earn at least 60 per cent of his "without injury" earnings because of the impairment consequences of the compensable lumbar spine injury?

1. The VWA tendered a Nabenet Suitable Employment Report dated 5 May 2025 authored by Kymberley Sayers, rehabilitation consultant. Ms Sayers outlined the physical demands and labour market factors associated with various potentially suitable employment options identified by Dr Sabetghadam in his report dated 9 January 2025.
2. In accordance with its evidentiary onus,[37] the VWA submitted that Mr Ahmadi had the capacity to work full time as a customer service officer, infringement notice officer and disability support worker.
3. Ms Sayers stated that each of those roles existed within a reasonable distance of Mr Ahmadi's Melbourne residence. Ms Sayers identified the critical demands and required tolerances for each of the roles. The salary/wage rates were stated as follows:

(a) Customer service officer - average salary $1,352 gross per week according to labour market insights Australia;

(b) Infringement notice officer - $1,562 gross per week for the assessed role in West Footscray;

(c) Disability care worker - average salary $1,564 gross per week according to labour market insights Australia.

1. Mr Ahmadi has the English language skills and aptitude to perform each of the roles identified. At issue is whether he has the physical capacity to work in any of those roles, and the capacity to do so on a reliable and consistent basis, given the impairment consequences of the compensable lumbar spine and consequential hip conditions.
2. I am required to take a real-world approach to the plaintiff's employment capacity. It requires more than a physical capacity to engage in a task or tasks.[38]
3. The VWA submitted that Mr Ahmadi was not sincere in his complaints of pain. If he had the pain he claimed, he would be prepared to have the treatment offered. I do not accept that submission. During cross-examination, Counsel for the VWA did not put to Mr Ahmadi that he was not suffering from the pain he claimed, nor that he was exaggerating his level of pain or restriction. It was not put to Mr Ahmadi that he was unreasonably refusing treatment.
4. I found Mr Ahmadi a generally straightforward witness. I accept his evidence as to his pain and restrictions by reason of his lower back and left hip conditions. Of particular relevance to this issue, I accept that Mr Ahmadi has a sitting, standing and walking tolerance of about 30 minutes, and has daily sleep difficulties.
5. I find that Mr Ahmadi is permanently unfit for his pre-injury employment. This is the consensus of the medical opinion.
6. Having considered the whole of the evidence, I also find that Mr Ahmadi is unable to consistently and reliably work in any suitable employment. I prefer the opinions of Dr Sullivan and Dr Yong in this regard. They both opined that Mr Ahmadi did not have the capacity to perform any suitable employment. Dr Yong considered the specific roles suggested by Nabenet individually and opined that Mr Ahmadi was unfit to perform each of them. Dr Yong's opinion better accords with the impairment consequences which I have accepted.
7. I prefer the opinions of Dr Sullivan and Dr Yong to the opinions of Mr Dooley and Dr Sabetghadam on this issue. In particular, I observe that Dr Sabetghadam opined that Mr Ahmadi was fit to work full time in each of the three suggested roles, but acknowledged that Mr Ahmadi's tolerances could be different on a day-to-day basis. He opined Mr Ahmadi might need to negotiate flexibility in the lifting, pushing, pulling, bending, working postures, sitting, standing and/or walking requirements of a role. In my view, Dr Sabatghadam's suggestion regarding the likely need for and variability of workplace accommodations tends against a capacity to consistently and reliably perform those roles in the real world. In short, in my view, any capacity for suitable employment is theoretical and not realistic.
8. I find that Mr Ahmadi is unfit to work as a customer service officer given his limited sitting and standing tolerances, as well as the effect of his sleep difficulties.
9. I find that Mr Ahmadi is unfit to work as an infringement notice officer given his limited walking and standing tolerances, as well as the impact of his sleep difficulties.
10. Finally, I find that Mr Ahmadi is unfit to work as a disability support worker given his limited functional tolerances, as well as the effect of his sleep difficulties.
11. I further accept that Mr Ahmadi's lower back and left hip conditions are stable, and his impairment consequences are likely to persist into the foreseeable future. His incapacity for work is permanent in the requisite sense.
12. I am satisfied that Mr Ahmadi is unable to earn at least $1,289 gross per week in suitable employment, and that is likely to continue into the foreseeable future.

Is the loss of earning capacity consequence of Mr Ahmadi's compensable lumbar spine injury "serious"?

1. I find that Mr Ahmadi's inability to perform his pre-injury work and any suitable employment now and into the foreseeable future is a serious loss of earning capacity consequence and he therefore satisfies the narrative test.

1. Given that I have found that Mr Ahmadi has satisfied the statutory threshold to claim loss of earning capacity damages with respect to his lumbar spine injury, he is also entitled to claim pain and suffering damages with respect to that injury.[39]
2. Mr Ahmadi has leave to issue common law proceedings claiming both pain and suffering and loss of earning capacity damages.
3. I will hear the parties on the issue of costs.

[2] Plaintiff's Amended Court Book ("PCB") 130

[24] Defendant's Amended Court Book ("DCB") 35

[34] [2013] VSCA 201, at paragraphs [21]-[22]

[35] [2025] VSCA 126, at paragraph [61]

[37] Giankos v SPC Ardmona Operations Ltd [2011] VSCA 121; (2011) 34 VR 120 at 144-145, paragraph [115]

[38] Richter v Driscoll & Ors [2016] VSCA 142; (2016) 51 VR 95

[39] Advanced Wire & Cable Pty Ltd and Victorian WorkCover Authority v Abdulle [2009] VSCA 170 at paragraph [63]