Comcare had originally denied liability to pay medical treatment expenses and incapacity payments, arguing his recent injury had not been linked to the historic accident.

However, the Administrative Appeals Tribunal overturned the Commonwealth workplace insurer’s decision and ordered it pay compensation for his treatment.

The tribunal heard, in 1995, bad weather meant a number of ACTEW workmen, including the man, had been forced indoors.

The man had been playing table tennis when he bent over to pick up the ball and injured himself.

He went home in "significant agony" and his partner later found him "lying on the floor crying and vomiting".

Soon after, a doctor diagnosed the injury as "an acute lumbar disc protrusion on the left side impinging on the L5-S1 nerve roots".

The following month, Comcare accepted liability for his claim for rehabilitation and compensation.

The man went back to work soon after and continued to work for ACTEW until he was made redundant in 2014.

During this time he continued to suffer back pain.

He then began work as a courier but exacerbated the injury, requiring time off work, and became unemployed mid-2015.

He then made a claim for an aggravation of the original lumbar disc protrusion.

However, Comcare rejected the fresh application as a medical report did not confirm a connection between the 1995 injury and the pain in 2015.

The man appealed the decision to the tribunal, arguing the two injuries were linked.

In response, Comcare claimed the 2015 injury was not linked to the 1995 accident, and a new impairment caused as a result of lifestyle factors, working physical jobs, natural aging, and congenital factors, such as thoracolumbar scoliosis.

Tribunal deputy president John Sosso found in favour of the man.

"A fair reading of all the evidence does not support the submission of [Comcare] that the symptoms of the applicant's 1995 lower back injury had substantially changed," the decision said.

"Indeed, there is a fairly constant thread over time linking the symptoms of the June 1995 injury to the symptoms he continues to experience.

"Having carefully considered all of the evidence the tribunal finds: the applicant continues to suffer from the effects of his June 1995 injury; the applicant continues to require medical treatment for the claimed condition; and the respondent is liable to compensate the applicant."

Mr Sosso found the man had repeatedly sought assistance for lower back issues following the 1995 injury.

"However, during that period he did not claim any sick leave on those problems and some of the forms he completed fail to mention lower back pain.

"While the latter matters raise issues for the applicant, the clear weight of evidence discloses that the applicant was complaining of lower back pain over an extended period of time, and regularly sought medical and other assistance for the relief of that pain."