Queensland police officer’s compensation battle revived over workplace sexual assault allegation

A Queensland police officer who suffered a psychological injury after an alleged sexual assault on the job job has won an appeal to reopen her case.

Silhouette of a young woman with problems - horizontal, isolated

A female Queensland police officer who suffered a psychological injury after allegedly being sexually assaulted on the job has notched up a big win in her battle for compensation, with her appeal to reopen her case granted this week.

It has been a tough road for the officer – the internal police investigation found “insufficient evidence” to substantiate the allegations made by her and a witness, while WorkCover and the Workers’ Compensation Regulator were also “not satisfied” with the claims.

But new evidence led to criminal charges being laid earlier this year, and the decision to instigate court proceedings was a major factor in the Queensland Industrial Relations Commission reviving her appeal this week against the Workers’ Compensation Regulator.

The female officer - who cannot be identified for legal reasons due to the ongoing court case - worked at a South East Queensland police station.

The QIRC judgment states that the alleged sexual assault occurred in October 2020. She reported the related psychological injury in September 2021, and applied for WorkCover three months later.

She did not report the alleged sexual assault to her employer until January 2022, and upon doing this, she applied for compensation within two weeks.

The officer made a formal complaint regarding the alleged sexual assault to the Ethical Standards Command in August 2023. It is not known when the police service’s internal investigation was finalised, but investigators deemed there was insufficient evidence for the allegations.

However, according to this week’s QIRC decision, “new evidence” came to light, and the officer became aware that the alleged perpetrator had been charged earlier this year.

She first submitted a claim with WorkCover in April 2022 for the incident and associated psychological injury, as well as a separate psychological injury claim due to workplace pressure linked to the police service’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate in 2021.

WorkCover only accepted the COVID-19 stressor as a factor in her injury, and ruled the sexual assault claim “could not be substantiated”.

In October 2022, the Workers’ Compensation Regulator went a step further – setting aside WorkCover’s original decision, and instead decided to wholly reject her application.

“The Regulator was not satisfied after consideration of the totality of factual evidence with respect to the sexual assault that there was sufficient evidence available to substantiate the event took place in the manner described by [the applicant],” the QIRC decision summarised.

“The Regulator had regard to what it described as inconsistencies between [the applicant’s] recollection of events and that of another witness, and an 18-month delay between the incident allegedly occurring in October 2020 and it being reported to her employer.”

This week’s QIRC decision in the officer’s favour concerned her application to recommence her legal fight and appeal the Regulator’s decision from October 2022.

In her decision, Industrial Commissioner Sharron Caddie said although the “new evidence” related to the sexual assault allegation was not part of the QIRC case, the fact that criminal charges had since been laid was a highly relevant factor.

“I have determined that the commencement of criminal proceedings in relation to the sexual assault allegation is a new development capable of providing additional information relevant to the consideration of the appeal,” she ruled.

“It would not be in the interests of justice to deprive [the applicant] of the opportunity to present that evidence in circumstances where procedurally the appeal is still at its start.

“I am persuaded that I should exercise my discretion and make an order that the applicant should be allowed to take further action on her appeal.”

The matter will now progress through the QIRC.