A court worker who sued for a back strain has been knocked back in her claim to get extra damages for psychiatric distress caused by the injury.
Depositions clerk Kerri Ann Sawtell suffered a lower back injury in May 2021 after twisting upwards to pass a file to a Maryborough Court magistrate, according to civil court documents.
For her injury, described as a “lumbar paravertebral muscle strain”, Ms Sawtell received workers’ compensation payments for some time until she was assessed by WorkCover in 2022 to have no degree of permanent impairment.
Ms Sawtell then filed a District Court damages suit in 2023 claiming around $400,000 in compensation for her physical injury, past economic loss, medical expenses and pain and suffering.
In 2025, Ms Sawtell sought to amend the claim to include a psychiatric injury, asserting the original physical injury caused her to develop ‘major depressive disorder’ and ‘panic disorder’ months after the original event.
In court filings in relation to the amended claim, it was revealed Ms Sawtell returned to work full-time in 2022, but left her employment in 2024.
Court documents revealed a doctor who assessed Ms Sawtell for the benefit of her amended claim said she suffered physical manifestation of anxiety, including vomiting, in the years after her injury.
“Ms Sawtell developed panic attacks following the physical injury,” he stated.
“These resolved, but then subsequently returned; this was at its worst in the period after stopping work in June 2024.
“She suffered panic attacks and found herself overwhelmed by small things.
“Panic attacks were now precipitated by thinking about work.”
Ms Sawtell had a history of panic attacks, according to medical records given to the court; however had not suffered any for seven years prior to the physical injury.
Court documents also outlined a report from a doctor, hired for the state’s case.
“The back pain, when it occurred in 2021, caused a time-limited aggravation or relapse of [the appellant’s] previous panic disorder and depression,” the doctor said, concluding Ms Sawtell suffered “no continuing psychiatric condition” at the time of his assessment in 2025.
The Rockhampton District Court decided against Ms Sawtell’s claims in August 2025, noting
Ms Sawtell did not follow correct procedure in bringing the psychiatric injury claim to court.
Ms Sawtell brought the decision to the Court of Appeal in Brisbane this month.
The panel handed down their decision on Tuesday, agreeing with the original findings of the District Court and denying Ms Sawtell’s application once more.
Primary Justice Shane Doyle took issue with the fact Ms Sawtell’s original injury claim never including note of psychiatric impact, only outlining the back injury.
“As a matter of the normal use of language, a mental illness, however caused, cannot readily be described as “lower back injury” or by any similar expression,” Justice Shane Doyle stated.
“The description of the injury as a lower back injury or the like does not include or describe the psychiatric impacts.”
Ms Sawtell was ordered to pay the cost of the appeal to the state.
