An already-damaged shoulder tendon that got worse in a car crash counts as a non-threshold injury, a NSW Review Panel has ruled.
The Personal Injury Commission handed down its determination on April 1, revoking an earlier certificate that had classified the claimant's right shoulder injury as threshold — a classification that would have capped his entitlements under the Motor Accident Injuries Act 2017.
Joseph Chidiac was 69 years old when another vehicle struck the passenger side of his car on February 24, 2024, causing the car to spin. He went to St George Hospital the same day complaining of right shoulder pain. He later reported lower back pain. He lodged a claim for statutory benefits against Allianz Australia Insurance Limited, the third-party insurer of the vehicle he says caused the accident.
The sticking point was his shoulder. Chidiac had a documented history of right shoulder trouble stretching back years. In 2007, an orthopaedic surgeon noted supraspinatus pathology and gave him a cortisone injection. In 2021, a sports chiropractor recorded clinical signs consistent with a rotator cuff problem. And in December 2023 - just two months before the crash - his GP and a physiotherapist each found signs pointing to a possible tear. An X-ray taken at the time was normal, but an ultrasound that had been requested was not performed until after the accident.
After the accident, an ultrasound in May 2024 revealed the supraspinatus tendon was absent - a chronic complete full-thickness tear.
Medical Assessor Home, who first assessed the claim in October 2025, found the tear could not have been caused by the accident and classified the shoulder injury as a contusion - a threshold injury. Chidiac sought a review.
The three-member Review Panel took a different view. It noted that by late December 2023, Chidiac had improved, had no shoulder pain during the day, and was completing his activities of daily living with no pain. That recovery, the Panel reasoned, indicated the tendon was only partially torn before the crash - not completely ruptured.
The accident, the Panel found, finished the job. In its words, "it is more probable than not that the motor accident on February 24, 2024 was the straw that broke the camel's back and led to the final tear of the remaining fibres and the completion of the rupture of the supraspinatus tendon."
Because the crash further tore tissue that was already partially ruptured, the Panel classified it as a "partial rupture" under section 1.6(2) of the MAI Act — placing it outside the threshold injury definition.
The lower back did not get the same result. The Panel found that injury was soft tissue in nature and that the claimant did not meet the two-sign test for radiculopathy required under the Motor Accident Guidelines.
For insurers, the decision is a practical reminder: when a claimant has pre-existing degeneration and post-accident imaging shows a complete tear, the absence of pre-accident soft tissue imaging may not be enough to sustain a threshold classification. The Panel was willing to piece together clinical records, treatment history, and functional recovery to work out what was there before - and what the accident did to it.
