In this episode of P.I. Case Note, Michelle Wright examines the Queensland Industrial Relations Commission’s decision in Chapman v Workers’ Compensation Regulator [2025] QIRC 307, which clarifies the scope of workers’ compensation appeals when the Regulator’s decision addresses only part of an ongoing claim. The case involved Mr Chapman, who suffered a right shoulder injury accepted by WorkCover but never received any payments for weekly benefits or medical expenses, had his entitlements terminated from 18 November 2022, and filed an appeal seeking compensation for the post-surgery period from May to November 2022—only to discover the Commission lacked jurisdiction to determine entitlements for that earlier period because it wasn’t addressed in the Regulator’s review decision.
The Commission’s comprehensive analysis reveals the critical boundaries of the scope of workers’ compensation appeals under the “hearing de novo” principle. While a hearing de novo requires the Commission to begin afresh and exercise for itself the discretion exercised by the Regulator—and while evidence may change—the issues to be determined remain the same as those before the Regulator. Applying the leading case Church v Blackwood & Workers’ Compensation Regulator (2015), the Commission emphasised that the scope of workers’ compensation appeals is determined by reference to the case or issue that was before the Regulator and any specific statutory provisions, not by the content of the review decision document alone. However, in this case, both WorkCover’s decision and the Regulator’s review decision specifically addressed only Mr Chapman’s entitlement to compensation beyond 18 November 2022. The Regulator’s decision made no determination with respect to Mr Chapman’s entitlement to compensation prior to that date. Mr. Chapman argued the “case” before the Regulator was his entire claim from May 2022 through termination in December 2022, but the Commission rejected this, noting that just as the appeal to the Commission is from the Regulator’s decision (not its reasons), the appeal to the Regulator is from WorkCover’s decision—and WorkCover’s decision concerned only the termination date forward.
Listen for Michelle Wright’s detailed analysis of this important decision on the scope of workers’ compensation appeals and the strategic implications for claim management. If you’re pursuing a workers’ compensation appeal and have outstanding issues from earlier in your claim, the experienced team at accident legal understands the critical importance of ensuring the Regulator addresses all disputed matters in its review decision. As Queensland’s trusted personal injury lawyers, we know that the scope of workers compensation appeals is limited to issues actually determined by the Regulator, and we’ll ensure your review application identifies every period and entitlement in dispute to preserve your appeal rights. Contact us for a free consultation on (07) 3740 0200—we’ll manage your claim strategically to ensure all disputed entitlements are properly addressed at each stage so you don’t lose appeal rights due to jurisdictional limitations.
