//
austlii:nsw/NSWPICMP/2026/112
General information, not legal advice.
NSWPICMP
2026-02-16
Original judgment source is linked above.
Mansell v Trustees of the Roman Catholic Church for the Diocese of Broken Bay [2026] NSWPICMP 112
Trustees of the Roman Catholic Church for the Diocese of Broken Bay
WORKERS COMPENSATION - Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998; psychological injury; lump sum claim; appellant worker alleged assessment on the basis of incorrect criteria and demonstrable error in the making of two of the six assessments under the psychiatric impairment rating scale categories, namely self-care and personal hygiene, and social and recreational activities; assessment in the challenged domain of social and recreational activities revoked on appeal but due to the operation of the conversion tables, the overall assessment of whole person impairment remained the same; Held - Medical Assessment Certificate confirmed.
Dr John Baker, a Medical Assessor, who issued a Medical Assessment Certificate (MAC) on 10 September 2025. 2. The appellant relies on the following grounds of appeal under s 327(3) of the Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998 (the 1998 Act): * the assessment was made on the basis of incorrect criteria, and * the MAC contains a demonstrable error. 3. The delegate is satisfied that, on the face of the application, at least one ground of appeal has been made out. The Appeal Panel has conducted a review of the original medical assessment but limited to the grounds of appeal on which the appeal is made. 4. Rule 128 of the Personal Injury Commission Rules 2021 (the PIC Rules) and Procedural Direction PIC7 - Appeals, reviews, reconsiderations and correction of obvious errors in medical disputes set out the practice and procedure in relation to the medical appeal process under s 328 of the 1998 Act. An Appeal Panel determines its own procedures in accordance with r 128(1) of the PIC Rules. 5. The assessment of permanent impairment is conducted in accordance with the SIRA NSW Workers Compensation Guidelines for the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment, 4th ed
1 March 2021 (the Guidelines) and the American Medical Association Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment, 5th ed (AMA 5).
"The following matters have been referred for assessment (s 319 of the 1998 Act):
page and paragraph number in NSW workers compensation guidelines
Chapter, page, paragraph, figure and table numbers in AMA5 Guides
WPI deductions pursuant to S323 for pre-existing injury, condition or abnormality (expressed as a fraction)
Sub-total/s % WPI (after any deductions in column 6)
Total % WPI (the Combined Table values of all sub-totals)
DSM-5-TR F 32.0 Major depressive disorder - mild severity.
The claimant was treated evidence-based antidepressant pharmacotherapy and evidence-based clinical psychological treatments.
The claimant reported that since the onset of the injury he was more reliant on the care and support of his daughter and son. He said his daughter provided cooking and grocery shopping support as he would be too low in his energy and irritable when in shopping centres. He said his daughter cooked meals for him and his son. He said he was able to do less of the maintenance of the house and he was reliant on the support of his son to assist with the garden. He said that he was independent in his self-care and personal hygiene and he was able to care for his children, when they were younger, for many years since the accident.
The claimant was assessed as having a Class 2 mild impairment.
The claimant reported that since the onset of the injury he was less interested in socialising with his adult children and he had lost most friends with whom he would play golf, attend cafes and the club or visit on a frequent basis.
The claimant enjoyed watching television sports. He enjoyed watching racing events and had an interest in historical racehorse events where specific horses became prominent Australian sires and mares for the industry. He said he did not gamble regularly and that his preference was for understanding and following predominant breeding. He said that he had recently attended a Family Day at the local NRL football club in QLD where he resided with his two adult children and their mother.
The claimant was assessed as having a Class 2 mild impairment.
The claimant said that since the onset of the injury his capacity to travel has been restricted to local and familiar areas. He said he was able to travel to Brisbane to visit his second partner. He is able to travel from his home to the Gold Coast which was familiar to him prior to the onset of the injury. He has restricted his driving to the local and familiar region of the Gold Coast since settling in QLD.
The claimant was assessed as having a Class 2 mild impairment.
The claimant said that his relationship with his adult children was strained because of the increased need to assist him. He said the mother of his children maintained an amicable relationship with him and their adult children.
The claimant said that he had travelled to Queensland to visit his new partner on alternative weekends until their relationship ceased after the onset of this injury. He said that his energy became too low, and he lost interest and intimacy in the relationship. He said he was not interested in forming a new relationship as he had lost trust.
The claimant was assessed as having a Class 3 moderate impairment.
The claimant said that after the onset of the injury his concentration persistence and pace became poor. He said He was less able to concentrate, and he would make errors whilst performing complex tasks. He had made errors with his banking and family finances since the onset of the injury. He had Lost interest in reading and following his sport. He said he was able to complete the necessary reports and performed the complex tasks required of his role in caring for the 3 residents with dementia at a slower pace with him having to check more frequently for errors then prior to the onset of the injury.
The claimant was assessed as having a Class 2 mild impairment.
The claimant found new employment before moving to QLD in 2020. He said he was working in a part time capacity and had not returned to full time employment. On arrival in QLD he continued to work part time in various roles. At the time of the assessment, he said he was working 23 hours per week enrol caring for three men with dementia. He said he worked one sleepover shift and two other shifts each week. He said he was unable to work longer hours as he would become too fatigued and low in his energy we've been making too many errors. The claimant was working in a role that required similar skills to that of his prior employment. The role he now worked was less demanding and did not cause him to experience severe psychological symptoms whilst working 23 hours per week.
The claimant was assessed as having a Class 2 mild impairment.
(a) in assessing Class 2 for self-care and personal hygiene when he should have assessed Class 3, and
(b) in assessing Class 2 for social and recreational activities when he should have assessed Class 3.
"The claimant said he was born in Crown St Women's Hospital, Sydney NSW. He attended St. John's Catholic primary school at Woy Woy, NSW. He then progressed to St Edmonds high school Gosford, NSW until Year 10. He then attended Umina high school and completed Year 11 before leaving.
The claimant then commenced work as a technician at Telecom in Pymble, NSW. He progressed to work in various capacities prior to starting work with this employer in 2012. He reported having various managers throughout his employment with this employer. He said that he would receive supervision sessions once every month to assist him in managing the complex role he had caring for "troubled youth." He said in the 18 months prior to the onset of this primary psychological injury he received no supervision sessions and his psychological injury increased in severity due to his employer not providing this essential assistance.
The claimant said he was psychologically injured whilst working with this employer as a direct care worker to adolescent clients under the age of 18 years. The claimant said that his last day of work was on 15 September 2017. He said he received a redundancy 2018.
The claimant reported that he was bullied and harassed whilst working with this employer. He said he was targeted and that coworkers would say to him, 'she (the manager) hates you...' The claimant reported that he had developed a depressed mood, poor sleep and increased agitation whilst thinking about the incidents and events he had witnessed and experienced.
The claimant reported that he was particularly distressed after he had advocated for a 13-year-old boy not to be near a 15-year-old adolescent. The claimant said he feared that the younger boy would be attacked as the older adolescence had a history of harming younger residents. The claimant told his manager; however the 13-year-old boy was transferred. The claimant was soon to discover that the 13-year-old boy was sexually assaulted by the 15-year-old adolescent.
The claimant said that he became increasingly distressed by the knowledge of the 13-year-old boy being harmed. He became low in this mood; he became irritable and agitated towards family and coworkers. His sleep became poor and he lost interest in his social, recreational and other activities of daily living. He recalls episodes of worrying and depressive ruminations. He lost hope that he could provide the minimum level care that was required for the safety of the residents for whom he cared.
The claimant said that he was working full time prior to the onset of the injury. He said he attempted to change employment and that he had completed a Certificate III to assist with this process of reskilling. He said that he was initially successful, however he was never able to return to full time employment for any employer since the onset of the injury.
The claimant reported during his employment with this employer he had commenced a relationship with a new partner after separating from the mother of his children. He said his new partner lived in QLD. He said that either she or he would fly every consecutive fortnight to meet each other. He said the relationship ceased in 2018 after he was made redundant because of the injury.
The claimant reported to his general medical practitioner the nature of the injury. He suffered significant side effects from the evidence based pharmacological treatment he received, having suffered from a severe episode of gastroesophageal reflux. The claimant was referred for psychological treatment with a clinical psychologist. He received evidence based psychological treatment. He said his treatment provided some benefits without his condition entering remission. He was not referred to a psychiatrist. He was not treated in a psychiatric hospital. He was not treated with repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) or Esketamine treatment for the injury.
The claimant said at the time of this assessment he was employed part time working about 23 hours per week as a carer for three men with dementia aged 60, 61 and 65 years in Queensland (QLD). The claimant said he left NSW in about 2020. He moved to QLD with his children and had worked part time in QLD in various roles before commencing his current employment.
The claimant said at the time of this assessment he was not using any evidence based psychological treatment because his symptoms had not improved. The claimant said he currently used mirtazapine 15mg orally at night as it assisted with his sleep without side effects. This is an evidence based antidepressant medication with clinical indication for major depressive disorder where poor sleep is presented as a predominant symptom by the claimant.
The claimant reporting that he was utilising cannabis oil, about 4 drops at bedtime; one cannabis capsule at bedtime; and cannabis paste used sparingly at bedtime. He said his use of cannabis relieved his insomnia and nighttime agitation and worries enabling sleep.
The claimant reported that he attends his general medical practitioner once every two months for follow up of this injury.
The claimant reported suffering from major depressive disorder symptoms which met DSM-5-TR F32.0 major depressive disorder - mild episode. He also had some symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder which is clinically known to present in some people with major depressive disorder.
DSM-5-TR criteria symptoms for major depressive disorder for this claimant are as follows:
The claimant meets the criterion for this symptom as he experiences ongoing thoughts of hopelessness that he would ever be able to return to fulltime employment, as well as reporting a depressed mood and sadness most days, nearly every day since the onset of the injury.
The claimant meets the criterion as he has lost interest in maintaining almost all social relationships and is unable to experience pleasure in all things including intimate relationships.
The claimant meets the criterion as he has worrying thoughts and depressive ruminations of hopelessness which impairs his capacity to initiate sleep and maintain sleep every night.
The claimant meets the criterion as he is too low in his energy and becomes too rapidly fatigued to work fulltime in any capacity since the onset of the injury.
The claimant meets the criterion as he is unable to organise and participate in the workplace as he could have prior to the onset of the injury. He has difficulty making decisions and is markedly indecisive when attempting to decide on his rostered hours of work. This inability to perform this complex task has resulted in him making no changes to his rostered hours for the last few years. He has difficulty managing the family finances and has made errors paying routine utility bills and whilst using online banking.
The claimant has reported nightmares, flashbacks and anger with content related to the work injury; however the number of symptoms were insufficient to meet the criteria for DSM-5-TR F43.1 posttraumatic stress disorder.
The claimant said whilst at school enjoy playing junior NRL football. In his years he played in the position of fullback and as a young adult he played in the position of lock. He trialled for South Sydney (Rabbitohs) football club. He said he was playing in the Sydney metropolitan local league when he was invited to trial for the Rabbitohs. He was carrying an injury to his left shoulder. His injury was conservatively managed, and he recovered without psychological or physical impairment. He did not progress any further within this professional sport.
The claimant reported being in a motor accident in 2011. He was driving the vehicle which was hit in the rear by the other car. He did not go to hospital after the motor accident. He was diagnosed with a whiplash injury to his neck by his general medical practitioner. He was diagnosed with two changes to his intervertebral discs. He was treated with physiotherapy. He recovered and returned to his career without psychological impairment.
The claimant reported whilst employed for this employer in 2015, he sustained an injury to his right hand. He said his finger was forcibly jammed in the door by one of the residents whom he was caring for. His finger was treated and recovered without any physical or psychological impairment.
The claimant reported that he was physically and psychologically well prior to commencing employment with this employer. The claimant did not report suffering from any prior psychiatric condition before his employment with this employer.
The claimant said that he had his tonsils surgically removed at 11 years and his appendix removed when he was about 14 years of age. He recovered from these surgical procedures without impairment.
The claimant said that at 25 years of age he was called to help a friend outside the unit block where his father was living. He said in the skirmish he was stabbed below the diaphragm and away from the liver in his upper abdomen. He was admitted to hospital and spent about 11 days in Gosford public hospital intensive care unit (ICU). He had an exploratory laparotomy to exclude injury to his internal organs. He recovered from this injury without psychological or physical impairment.
The claimant did not report suffering from any allergies. He reported having stopped drinking alcohol and did not smoke tobacco. He did not meet DSM-5-TR F63.0 criteria for a gambling disorder.
The claimant commenced work after leaving school in year 11. He found employment working as a telecom technician between the ages of 17 to 20 years. The claimant progressed to work in various jobs until he became a manager of a bottle shop. He said he worked in the hospitality industry has a barman and bottle shop manager in various hotels and retail shops until about 26 years of age.
The claimant said that he next commenced work for Armaguard in the armed security section for this employer. He said he worked replenishing ATMs with cash for various clients. He said he was never threatened. He never discharged his weapon. The claimant said he was not psychologically or physically injured whilst working for this employer.
The claimant then found employment in security as a security guard at Gosford public hospital. He worked as a security guard until about 2010. The claimant said he was not psychologically or physically injured whilst working for this employer. After completing his work as a security guard he found employment working as a green keeper until commencing employment with this employer in 2012.
The claimant said that as an adult his parents informed him that both he and his sister were adopted children. The claimant was given the name and contact of his birth mother. The claimant had brief contact with his birth mother. The claimant was unable to find his biological father as his birth mother could not provide this information. The claimant said he decided to cease communicating with his birth mother and he decided not to pursue his biological heritage any further. He said that his childhood provided by his parents was excellent and he enjoyed his childhood playing sport and participating in his career.
The claimant said that prior to the onset of the injury he was independent in his self-care and personal hygiene. He was able to continue the activities of daily living which included purchasing groceries, cooking for himself and his children, cleaning the house, laundering clothes and maintaining his residence without impairment.
The claimant reported that since the onset of the injury he was more reliant on the care and support of his daughter and son. He said his daughter provided cooking and grocery shopping support as he would be too low in his energy and irritable when in shopping centres. He said his daughter cooked meals for him and son. He said he was able to do less of the maintenance of the house and he was reliant on the support of his son to assist with the garden. He said that he was independent in his self-care and personal hygiene and that he was able to care for his children for many years since the accident. The claimant was assessed as a Class 2 mild impairment.
The claimant said that prior to the onset of the injury he enjoyed watching and following racing sports on television. He said he would watch car racing and thoroughbred horse racing. He enjoyed researching and learning about the history of horse racing in Australia and elsewhere. He was interested in historical events achieved by specific sires such as Kingston Town and Think Big. He said he was not a frequent gambler and that he rarely places any bets. He does not bet on NRL and he does not use poker machines. He has never had financial difficulties because of unpaid gambling debts. He had never had any cravings or negative emotional symptoms because of gambling.
The claimant said he enjoyed walking his pet dog most days prior to the injury. He said he enjoyed attending extended family events. He said he enjoyed visiting friends, playing golf and attending cafes, and the club. The claimant reported that since the onset of the injury he was less interested in socialising with his adult children and he had lost most friends with whom he would play golf, attend cafes and the club or visit on a frequent basis.
The claimant enjoyed watching television sports. He enjoyed watching racing events and had an interest in historical racehorse events where specific horses became prominent Australian sires and mares for the industry. He said he did not gamble regularly and that his preference was for understanding and following predominant breeding. He said that he had recently attended a Family Day at the local NRL football club in QLD where he resided with his two adult children. On the day of the football game the claimant attended with the mother of their children (ex-wife). The claimant was assessed as a Class 2 mild impairment.
The claimant said that he was able to travel without impairment. He said the last time he had travelled internationally was in 2018 to Bali, Indonesia. He said he has not travelled internationally since then. He said he was in a long-distance relationship with his partner who lived in Queensland when he was living in New South Wales. He was able to fly to Queensland to meet her as organised between them on every consecutive fortnight, before the onset of the injury. He was able to drive and travel in work vehicles provided by Armaguard without physical or psychological impairment.
The claimant said that since the onset of this injury his capacity to travel has been restricted to local and familiar areas. He said he was able to travel to Queensland and that Brisbane and the Gold Coast were familiar to him prior to the onset of the injury. He has restricted his driving to the local and familiar regions of the Gold Coast since settling in QLD. He does not drive outside of his local area or to familiar locations which are not heavily populated when walking his dog on the beach or in the hinterland. The claimant was assessed as having a Class 2 mild impairment.
The claimant said he had separated from the mother of his children prior to the onset of the injury. He said that he had two close male friends with whom he would regularly telephone and socialise with when they were in Sydney. He said that he
The claimant said that had formed a new relationship with a new partner after his separation from the mother of his children. He stated he would travel to Queensland to visit his new partner on alternative weekends. The claimant said that the relationship with his partner had ceased because of his loss of interest, low energy and loss of intimacy within the relationship. He said he was not interested in forming a new relationship as he had lost trust.
The claimant said that his relationship with his adult children was strained because of their increased need to assist him. He said the mother of his children maintained an amicable relationship with him and their adult children. The claimant was assessed as having a Class 3 moderate impairment.
The claimant said that he has been able to participate and learn all the necessary roles for the duties and positions that he had previously worked. He had been able to complete the necessary security training prior to working in this complex industry role without impairment. He was able to read about, and follow, his sporting interests without difficulty. The claimant said that prior to the injury he was able to perform all the duties of his role with this employer without impairment.
The claimant said that after the onset of the injury his concentration, persistence and pace became poor. He said he was less able to concentrate, and he would make errors whilst performing complex tasks. He had made errors with his banking and family finances since the onset of the injury. He had lost interest in reading about, and following, his sport. He said he was able to complete the necessary reports and performed the complex tasks required of his role in caring for the three residents with dementia at a slower pace with him having to check more frequently for errors then prior to the onset of the injury. The claimant was assessed as having a Class 2 mild impairment.
The claimant said he had worked in various roles without difficulty prior to commencing employment with this employer. He said he was able to find new employment without difficulty throughout his career prior to employment with this employer. He said that he left work on the date of the injury and was made redundant in 2018 by the employer.
The claimant found new employment before moving to QLD in 2020. He said he was working in a part time capacity and had not returned to full time employment. On arrival in QLD he continued to work part time in various roles. At the time of the assessment, he said he was working 23 hours per week caring for three men with dementia. He said he worked one sleepover shift and two other shifts each week. He said he was unable to work longer hours as he would become too fatigued and low in his energy which caused him to make too many errors. The claimant was working in a role that required similar skills to that of his prior employment. The role he now worked was less demanding and did not cause him to experience severe psychological symptoms whilst working 23 hours per week. The claimant was assessed as having a Class 2 mild impairment."
"The claimant presented as an irritable, and mildly unkempt man. He looked older than his stated age. He was irritable and distressed when describing the targeting, bullying and harassment he had suffered. He had an angry outburst when talking about his experiences of bullying and harassment, including not having his advice acted on before the injury and removal of supervision that was essential to his emotional wellbeing whilst performing his employed role.
The claimant reported that he was depressed in his mood most days for most of the day. His affect was mood congruent. He had angry and distressed outbursts whilst remembering the events that caused the injury including his intent of wanting to protect the younger boy who later was sexually assaulted when moved to another accommodation within the service.
The claimant was oriented in time, place and person. He did not require prompting to remain on task. He could concentrate for more than 30 minutes prior to requiring a break to resettle. He spoke about his concentration having become poor because of his depressive ruminations and worries for the young boy's future safety since the onset of the injury.
The claimant reported ruminations about hopelessness for his future career. He spoke about loss of interest in most things such as playing golf or socialising with the intent of finding a new partner as he had before the injury. He did not speak about suicidal thoughts and had not attempted to complete suicide. His judgement was fair. He was insightful into his condition."
The claimant reported conflict between his manager and himself. The claimant reported that he was bullied and harassed by his employer. He said he was not provided with the necessary support for him to work in a safe workplace. He said he was targeted and bullied in his role. He stated he was stopped from having supervision sessions for the last 18 months of his work for the employer. He informed his employer that the supervision sessions were important in enabling him to work.
The claimant stated that he became depressed and began to have increasing thoughts of hopelessness after one of the younger residents was moved against the advice of the claimant and the same boy was sexually assaulted by an older adolescent male who had a history of violence towards others. He developed a depressed mood, loss of hope for his future career and ruminations of hopelessness that the younger boy was injured in what the claimant believed was an avoidable risk. He stopped work in 2017 and was made redundant in 2018. His condition failed to remit.
At this assessment the claimant continued to suffer from symptoms consistent with DSM-5-TR F32.0 Major depressive disorder - single episode of mild severity.
The claimant meets this criterion as he experiences ongoing thoughts of hopelessness that he would ever be able to return to fulltime employment, as well as reporting a depressed mood and sadness most days, nearly every day since the onset of the injury.
The claimant meets this criterion as he has lost interest in maintaining almost all social relationships and is unable to experience pleasure in all things including intimate relationships.
The claimant meets this criterion as he has worrying thoughts and depressive ruminations of hopelessness which impairs his capacity to initiate sleep and maintain sleep every night.
The claimant meets this criterion as he is too low in his energy and becomes too rapidly fatigued to work fulltime in any capacity since the onset of the injury.
The claimant meets this criterion as he is unable to organised and participate in the workplace as he could have prior to the onset of the injury. He has difficulty making decisions and is markedly indecisive when attempting to decide on his rostered hours of work. This inability to perform this complex task has resulted in him making no changes to his rostered hours for the last few years. He has difficulty managing the family finances and has made errors paying routine utility bills and online banking.
The claimant meets this criterion as he has been unable to return to working with people under the age of 18 years. He had lost his relationship with his long distance (second partner) after he had separated completely from the mother of his children. He has been unable to return to fulltime employment in any occupation since the injury.
The claimant meets this criterion as he does not drink alcohol, or smoke tobacco. He does not suffer from a medical condition that may have symptoms like a major depressive disorder.
The claimant's use of cannabis products, whilst not evidence-based treatment for this injury, is clinically known to induce sleep in some claimants. The use of cannabis is restricted to the claimant's induction of sleep. He does not meet criteria for DSM-5-TR F F12.10 Cannabis use disorder.
The occurrence of the major depressive episode is not better explained by schizoaffective disorder, schizophrenia, schizophreniform disorder, or other specified and unspecified schizophrenia spectrum and other psychotic disorders.
The claimant meets this criterion as he does not have a history of, or current episode of any of these listed conditions.
The claimant meets this criterion as he does not have a history of, or current episode of any of these listed conditions.
The claimant presented as a reliable person who did not misrepresent his circumstances. He was consistent in his report at the assessment which was similar to the reports provided by the examining psychiatrists who diagnosed him with a depressive disorder prior to this assessment."
"The facts on which I have based my assessment of whole person impairment are:
The claimant was independent in his lifestyle, career and sports prior to the onset of this primary psychological injury. He could travel internationally and domestically without impairment. He had worked in various other roles without impairment prior to commencing his employment with this employer. He was capable of adapting to the complex tasks required of each role he was employed in before the onset of the injury.
The claimant was targeted, bullied, harassed and not provided with essential supervision whilst working for this employer. He had been provided with supervision before the new manager commenced. After the new manager commenced he was not provided with the essential supervision that the claimant had expected to be provided by his employer to maintain his emotional wellbeing. During the time without supervision and whilst being targeted, bullied and harassed he suffered the injury. This caused the claimant to suffer the injury from which he had not recovered fully since the date of onset of the injury in 2017 whilst employed by this employer.
In my opinion the claimant has a mild whole person impairment as assessed using the psychiatric impairment rating scale. From careful consideration of the forwarded documents as well as the findings of the assessment, I note that 1% WPI adjustment in the claimant's whole person impairment for treatment effect is reasonable and not at odds with the evidence.
The adjustment of 1% WPI is not related to the use of cannabis. The use of cannabis is not an evidence-based treatment for the injury. No treatment effect adjustment has been made in relation to cannabis."
"My brief comments regarding the other medical opinions and findings submitted by the parties and, where applicable, the reasons why my opinion differs
9. I am unmarried and reside at the above-mentioned address with my son Luke Mansell born 16 April 2000. I have a daughter Sienna Mansell born 11 May 2005 who stays with me week on week off. Their mother and I were partners until 2007 when we split up. My son is dependent on my wage but may start work soon. Sienna is part dependent on me**.**
10. I go to the gym most days say five out of seven days. I do weights and a little bit of everything at the gym. I am a member at Peninsula Leisure Centre.
13. I have not made any psychological claims for injury previously.
14. I have made the following previous worker's compensation claims for physical injury:
17. Prior to my recent diagnosis of anxiety, depression, and stress, I had not experienced any previous psychological conditions (including stress, anxiety or depression) and had not sought medical treatment or taken any medications for any psychological conditions (including stress, anxiety or depression). I have always thought of myself as made of steel, I suppose.
30. Prior to April 2012 I was employed by Central Coast Area Health Service as a security officer from 2003. I resigned to take up DCW work.
Supplementary Statement of Evidence of Troy Mansell
9. On 22 April 2012, I commenced my employment with Trustees for the Roman Catholic Church for the Diocese of Broken Bay.
10. On 29 June 2015, I commenced my role as a Direct Care Worker ('DCW'). I was in this employ on a full-time basis. This was my first time working in out-of-home care.
17. On 15 September 2017, I stopped work with Catholic Care and went on unpaid leave before lodging a workers compensation claim because I could no longer cope with the stress.
18. In or around 2018, Catholic Care offered me a redundancy type settlement, in return for my resignation.
19. On 29 June 2018, I accepted a redundancy from Catholic Care after mediation was
20. I did not want to return to Catholic Care because it was a horrible work environment, where I was bullied and harassed and which failed, on multiple occasions, in their duty of care to me.
21. On 5 June 2018, I commenced my employment with Evolution Support Services ('Evolution') as a Disability Support Worker on a part-time basis, working between twenty-five (25) hours and thirty-eight (38) hours per week. While in this employ, I worked with people with varying levels of trauma. I left my employ with Evolution on 29 July 2020.
22. While employed with Evolution Support Services, I completed a traineeship and acquired a Cert III in Individual Support. For this traineeship, I was nominated for the NSW Training Awards and was awarded Regional Trainee of the Year in the Rising Star category. I was eligible for the NSW State Awards Night as a category winner.
23. On 1 August 2020, I moved to Queensland. The main reason for my relocation was to get out of my previous area away from Catholic Care and make a fresh start.
Psychologist Kelly Gay report dated 3 November 2017
Troy has attended five counselling sessions with me under his workplace EAP.
During our sessions Troy has reported severe distress about his and his work colleague's treatment by his employer, Catholic Care.
Psychologist Kathy Paterson report dated 31 May 2018
Troy presented describing significant symptoms of anxiety and depression due to increasingly stressful conditions at his workplace.
Psychiatrist Dr Kai Tai (Frank) Chow dated 7 June 2023
Mr Mansell is a 50-year-old male living at home with his two children aged 18 and 23. He is working full-time as a labourer in glass fitting (balcony, shower screen and pool glass). He has been in the job since November 2022.
Due to bullying and harassment, he wanted to sit down with upper management to talk about their ongoing difficulties. He said he had no supervision at least in the last 12 months at work.
The claimant reported that prior to the onset of the bullying and harassment he would receive monthly supervision sessions provided by the employer. He said that he received no supervision session on his shift between work locations. He said he was not provided with the psychological support required to manage the nature of his workplace and role.
He was prescribed Lorazepam and temazepam and an antidepressant earlier on. He is still taking sleeping tablets at times.
He moved to Robina, Gold Coast with his children in August 2020. He then worked with Aruma, working full-time in children services, supporting children with trauma in the home setting. He left in December 2021.
Your diagnosis of any injury sustained by our client.
I do not concur with this assessment of whole person impairment. I note that the claimant is independent in his self-care and personal hygiene, which is consistent with Class 2 mild impairment and not class 3 moderate impairment - requiring or should require support because of the claimant not being independent in his self-care and personal hygiene."
Table 11.1: Psychiatric impairment rating scale - self care and personal hygiene
No deficit, or minor deficit attributable to the normal variation in the general population
Mild impairment: able to live independently; looks after self adequately, although may look unkempt occasionally; sometimes misses a meal or relies on take-away food.
Moderate impairment: Can't live independently without regular support. Needs prompting to shower daily and wear clean clothes. Does not prepare own meals, frequently misses meals. Family member or community nurse visits (or should visit) two to three times per week to ensure minimum level of hygiene and nutrition.
Severe impairment: Needs supervised residential care. If unsupervised, may accidentally or purposefully hurt self.
Totally impaired: Needs assistance with basic functions, such as feeding and toileting.
"The claimant reported that since the onset of the injury he was more reliant on the care and support of his daughter and son. He said his daughter provided cooking and grocery shopping support as he would be too low in his energy and irritable when in shopping centres. He said his daughter cooked meals for him and his son. He said he was able to do less of the maintenance of the house and he was reliant on the support of his son to assist with the garden. He said that he was independent in his self-care and personal hygiene and he was able to care for his children, when they were younger, for many years since the accident.
The claimant was assessed as having a Class 2 mild impairment."
"I do not concur with this assessment of whole person impairment. I note that the claimant is independent in his self-care and personal hygiene, which is consistent with Class 2 mild impairment and not class 3 moderate impairment - requiring or should require support because of the claimant not being independent in his self-care and personal hygiene."
Table 11.2: Psychiatric impairment rating scale - social and recreational activities
No deficit, or minor deficit attributable to the normal variation in the general population: regularly participates in social activities that are age, sex and culturally appropriate. May belong to clubs or associations and is actively involved with these.
Mild impairment: occasionally goes out to such events e.g. without needing a support person, but does not become actively involved (e.g. dancing, cheering favourite team).
Moderate impairment: rarely goes out to such events, and mostly when prompted by family or close friend. Will not go out without a support person. Not actively involved, remains quiet and withdrawn.
Severe impairment: never leaves place of residence. Tolerates the company of family member or close friend, but will go to a different room or garden when others come to visit family or flat mate.
Totally impaired: Cannot tolerate living with anybody, extremely uncomfortable when visited by close family member.
"The claimant reported that since the onset of the injury he was less interested in socialising with his adult children and he had lost most friends with whom he would play golf, attend cafes and the club or visit on a frequent basis.
The claimant enjoyed watching television sports. He enjoyed watching racing events and had an interest in historical racehorse events where specific horses became prominent Australian sires and mares for the industry. He said he did not gamble regularly and that his preference was for understanding and following predominant breeding. He said that he had recently attended a Family Day at the local NRL football club in QLD where he resided with his two adult children and their mother.
The claimant was assessed as having a Class 2 mild impairment."
Mansell
Trustees of the Roman Catholic Church for the Diocese of Broken Bay [2026] NSWPICMP 112;