case a - The case for the employer

case b - The case for the widow

• Since there is insufficient evidence of a connection between the man's knee injuries and his suicide some 18 months later, we are not liable to pay a death benefit. There is no mention of depression in any of the man's medical certificates following his knee injuries. Further, as the medical evidence shows, the man's knee injuries were actually starting to improve before his death.
• On the other hand, there is clearly sufficient evidence that the man had other problems in his life, any one of which could have caused major depression and ultimately death by suicide. The man was having marital problems at the time of his death. He and his wife were arguing frequently, including on the day of his death. He had also recently been diagnosed as suffering from emphysema, a fatal health condition.
• There is also a well-documented history of mental health problems that predate the man's work injury. In 2004 he attempted suicide by firearm, after suffering a major life-threatening injury in a former job. Following that suicide attempt he spent eight weeks in a mental health facility, where he was treated by a psychiatrist. At the time of his work injury in 2011 he was still taking medication for that condition.
• In addition to there being no nexus between the man's injuries and his death by suicide, the Workers Compensation Act precludes recovery of a death benefit where the death resulted from an intentional self-inflicted injury. As our medical expert has stated, the suicide notes left by the man confirm that his death was intentional and a result of a considered act of self-inflicted injury. There was no psychiatric evidence that his volition was overthrown.
• Since there was no connection between the work related injury and the man's suicide, and because the claim for death benefits is precluded by the man's intentional suicidal act, the commission must reject the widow's claim.

• There is a clear connection between my husband's knee injuries and his suicide.
• Prior to his work injury, we had a happy marriage, travelling together in our caravan and visiting our children and grandchildren. Following his knee injuries, his mental health deteriorated significantly because he was frustrated by his situation, in constant pain and unable to perform his old duties at work. His inability to participate in previously enjoyed activities, or to return to the work he loved, caused him to suffer severe mood swings and a change in personality. This caused an increased tension in our marriage, rather than, as the employer suggests, our marital tensions being the cause of my husband's mental health problems.
• My daughter had a discussion with her father shortly prior to his death. He disclosed to her that he hated being in pain all the time, felt heartbroken that he could not be his "old self" and believed his life was over since his work accident.
• It's true that my husband was diagnosed with depression some years prior to his death. However, at the time of his work injury, his depression was well controlled by medication. This has been confirmed by my medical expert before the commission.
• This medical expert has also expressed the view that my husband's suicide was not an intentional act, since his thought processes were distorted by his severe depressed mood.
• Since my husband's suicide was the result of his knee injuries and his suicide cannot be said to be an intentional self-inflicted act, the employer's insurer is liable to pay out the death benefit.

So, which case won?

Cast your judgment below to find out