---
title: "Test a New South Wales heart attack or stroke against section 9B"
url: "https://ailawframework.com/practice/personal-injury-and-compensation/test-a-heart-attack-or-stroke-claim-against-the-employment-test/new-south-wales"
type: "task_jurisdiction_version"
site: "AI Law Framework"
id: "A21-WC20261023-19-NSW"
practice_area: "Personal Injury & Compensation (workers compensation, CTP/TAC, medical negligence)"
tier: "yellow"
lawyer_review: "required"
jurisdictions: ["NSW"]
last_reviewed: "2026-10-25"
---

# Test a New South Wales heart attack or stroke against section 9B

> From the diagnosis and the nature of the employment, using a firm-controlled tool, table section 9B's significantly-greater-risk test and the width of the definitions. Do not decide the risk.

Canonical page: https://ailawframework.com/practice/personal-injury-and-compensation/test-a-heart-attack-or-stroke-claim-against-the-employment-test/new-south-wales  
Last reviewed: 2026-10-25

Site index for agents: https://ailawframework.com/llms.txt

## Key facts

| Fact | Value |
| --- | --- |
| Practice area | [Personal Injury & Compensation (workers compensation, CTP/TAC, medical negligence)](https://ailawframework.com/practice/personal-injury-and-compensation.md) |
| Human involvement | Yellow: Lawyer and AI draft together |
| How AI is used | From the diagnosis and the nature of the employment, using a firm-controlled tool, table section 9B's significantly-greater-risk test and the width of the definitions. Do not decide the risk. |
| What the lawyer must review | Decide whether the nature of the employment gave rise to a significantly greater risk. Do not add a main-contributing-factor element. Section 9B does not state one. Read the whole definition before saying the event is outside it. Health and wage records stay in a firm-controlled tool. Apply ASCR r 9, APP 11, and the notifiable-breach test. |
| Written for | New South Wales |
| Applies to | [Test a heart attack or stroke claim against the employment test](https://ailawframework.com/practice/personal-injury-and-compensation/test-a-heart-attack-or-stroke-claim-against-the-employment-test.md) |

## Checking plan

**Verify against sources**

No compensation is payable for an injury that consists of, is caused by, results in or is associated with a heart attack injury or stroke injury unless the nature of the employment gave rise to a significantly greater risk than if the worker had not been employed in employment of that nature. The definitions are exhaustive and extend to specified rhythm disorders, vessel injury, haemorrhage, occlusion, dissection, cerebral events and consequential mental harm. The disease page's main-contributing-factor test is a different rule and is not added to section 9B.

- What the AI does: From the diagnosis and the nature of the employment, using a firm-controlled tool, table section 9B's significantly-greater-risk test and the width of the definitions. Do not decide the risk.
- What the lawyer does: The lawyer decides the legal question, checks the sources, and authorises anything the family or the insurer will receive.
- Who reviews: Lawyer competent in statutory workers compensation
- Basis: Checked against the linked sources on 23 October 2026. Confirm the current instrument before reliance.

## Checks the lawyer makes

1. Compare the diagnosis with the section 9B definitions, not with the everyday name of the event.
2. Ask about the nature of the employment and the risk it created.
3. Do not require employment to be the main contributing factor unless a different section, opened for this injury, says so.
4. Confirm the official in-force text. This reading is AustLII.

## Notes

- If this is lodged with the Personal Injury Commission, Procedural Direction PIC13 keeps health records in a controlled environment and forbids a generative tool from writing a person's evidence.
- The section was read on an AustLII consolidation. Confirm the in-force wording on the official legislation site before reliance.
- If health or wage records leave the firm-controlled tool, decide whether a Privacy Act 1988 (Cth) breach is notifiable.

## Practical guide

Jurisdiction: New South Wales, Workers Compensation Act 1987, section 9B

**Deliverable**: A section 9B risk note.

**Inputs**

- Diagnosis, including the cardiac or cerebral finding
- The nature of the employment and the tasks
- Medical opinion on risk, if the lawyer has one

**Example**: Illustrative example: A worker with angina says the employment was stressful. The note asks whether the nature of that employment gave rise to a significantly greater risk, and it records that angina is inside the opened definition. The lawyer decides the risk. The tool does not.

**Stop and escalate when**

- The event's medical name is unclear.
- The draft adds a main-contributing-factor test from the disease page.

Checked 2026-10-23.

## Sources

- [AustLII: Workers Compensation Act 1987, section 9B](https://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/wca1987255/s9b.html) (checked 2026-10-23)
- [SIRA claims guide: disease injury](https://www.sira.nsw.gov.au/workers-compensation-claims-guide/understanding-the-claims-journey/eligibility/disease-injury) (checked 2026-10-23)

*Practice guidance for planning and review. Confirm current primary sources and the requirements of the actual matter. This is general information, not legal advice.*