A former Fraser Coast court clerk suing for more than $400,000 over claims of a lower back injury has lost her bid to seek further damages over mental health problems she alleged she subsequently suffered as a result.
Kerri Ann Sawtell has been fighting the state government in court over the injuries, which she claimed were initially suffered as a result of her work at the Maryborough Magistrates Court in May 2021.
A newly published Queensland Court of Appeal decision, handed down on April 7 and published online, said Ms Sawtell suffered what she described as a “soft tissue injury” in her lower back while working for the Department of Justice.
She alleged the injury was suffered due to “turning and twisting reaching upward behind her handing files to the Magistrate or taking files from the Magistrate”.
Justice Shane Doyle said in the published decision Ms Sawtell received compensation for her lower back injury for “some period”, with WorkCover issuing a notice of degree of permanent impairment “at zero” in April 2022.
In October 2022, Ms Sawtell issued a notice of claim for damages outlining her lower back injury.
Court proceedings between her and the state government started in July 2023, with court documents showing she was seeking more than $400,000 in damages for the lower back injury.
The decision said two medical reports were subsequently obtained, one on Ms Sawtell’s behalf and one on the state government’s.
Justice Doyle said the one for Ms Sawtell diagnosed her as suffering from major depressive and panic disorders and she was “not expected to ever return to her previous place of work”.
The one obtained on behalf of the state government said her injury initially caused a “relapse of (Ms Sawtell’s) previous panic order and depression” but it was “short-lived”.
In April 2025 she lodged an amended statement of claim stating she suffered a “psychiatric injury” as a “consequence” of her lower back one.
Her claim was rejected by the court following a District Court hearing in August 2025, with the presiding judge ruling Ms Sawtell had not adhered to “strict compliance” requirements of the legislation when claiming for a consequential injury.
The judge said WorkCover “have not been asked, nor had the chance to make a determination, that (Ms Sawtell) has suffered a psychiatric injury, in accordance with … the Act”.
As a result he struck out the pleadings of a psychiatric injury, saying they were “defective and offend … in that they disclose no reasonable cause of action, have a tendency to prejudice or delay a fair trial, and are otherwise an abuse of the processes of the Court”.
Ms Sawtell appealed, only to be unanimously rebuffed by the three-man Court of Appeal.
Justice Doyle found in his decision Ms Sawtell’s injuries were separate and “she may not seek damages for that injury without the insurer deciding that she has sustained it”.
“Nor, as mentioned, was there any pleaded case or evidence that the appellant would seek, and would be likely be able, to satisfy the requirements to be able to seek damages for the psychiatric injury at any time,” Justice Doyle said.
He gave leave to Ms Sawtell’s appeal, dismissed it, and ordered she pay the state government’s costs.
There was no ruling from either court on the remainder of Ms Sawtell’s claims over her back injury.