New workers' comp protections meet a hard lesson on AI in legal submissions
A New South Wales firefighter who allegedly moonlighted as a junior doctor has lost most of his victimisation case against Fire and Rescue NSW.
The decision, handed down on 20 May 2026 in Sarson v Fire and Rescue NSW (No 2) [2026] NSWIRComm 1043, is a useful read for any HR team navigating workers' compensation claims, suspensions, and the new workplace protections that came into force last July.
It is also, as Commissioner Janet McDonald made clear, a reminder that submissions prepared with the help of artificial intelligence still need to be checked by a human being.
Dr Andrew Sarson, a station officer at St Mary's Station, hurt his knee getting out of a fire truck in January 2025 and lodged a workers' compensation claim. A few months later, FRNSW received information suggesting he was presenting himself as a medical doctor, offering certificates to fellow firefighters, and working full-time as a Junior Medical Officer at Nepean Hospital. FRNSW says none of that secondary work had been declared. Sarson disputes this.
By July 2025, he was suspended on full pay while a misconduct investigation got under way.
The heart of his case was straightforward. He argued FRNSW had targeted him because he had claimed workers' compensation, a newly protected attribute under section 210(1)(j) of the Industrial Relations Act 1996 (NSW). That provision only came into force on 3 July 2025.
Sarson, who represented himself, sought leave to add a long list of further alleged detriments, from payroll deductions to FRNSW's dealings with Nepean Blue Mountains Local Health District. Most were filed well outside the 21-day window the Act allows, and most were refused. The Commissioner dismissed his original claim about FRNSW's information-seeking letter and granted leave only for two narrower issues: overpayment deductions taken from his pay from 16 October 2025, and any decisions made from 9 March 2026 to keep him suspended.
The AI moment
The judgment also contains a quiet but unmistakable rebuke. Sarson's written submissions quoted Commissioner McDonald herself, but the quote did not exist. They also misdescribed a Full Bench ruling.
The Commissioner pointed to the Commission's Practice Note 33 on generative AI, which requires authors to check that every citation and authority actually exists. "It appears that this was not done in this case," she noted.
What it means for HR
For HR practitioners, three points are worth tucking away.
The new workers' compensation protections have real bite. Any detrimental action taken after 3 July 2025 against an employee who claims workers' comp can now be tested as victimisation, even where the underlying injury predates the law.
Periodic suspension reviews are not a formality. The Commissioner accepted that each 30-day decision to keep an employee suspended can, on its face, amount to a separate act of victimisation. Document the reasoning each time.
And the conventional levers, including secondary employment policies, conflict-of-interest reviews, and overpayment recoveries, remain available. But their timing against an injured worker will be examined closely.
The matter has been listed for directions on 2 June 2026, with FRNSW's strike-out application still to be heard.
