Rahman v Insurance Australia Ltd t/as NRMA Insurance [2022] NSWSC 1079

Rahman v Insurance Australia Ltd t/as NRMA Insurance [2022] NSWSC 1079

Time was extended because of the uncertainties facing the claimant, the assumption that judicial review of the initial medical assessment was appropriate, the absence of prejudice, and the absence of objection. The amended summons was dismissed because the impugned 'no evidence' statement, read in context, referred to the absence of persuasive evidence of a causal link between the plaintiff's current psychiatric condition and the motor accident and involved the assessor's evaluative expert judgment, not legal error. The assessor's preliminary view did not show prejudgment or procedural unfairness, particularly where he identified inconsistencies and gave the plaintiff an opportunity to...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 August 2022
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review of a Medical Assessment Certificate and Decision Refusing Referral to a Review Panel Under Motor Accident Legislation / Amended Summons; Application for Extension of Time; Principal Judgment
Outcome
Extension of time granted; amended summons dismissed; plaintiff ordered to pay the first defendant's costs.
Legal Topics
['medical Assessment' 'psychiatric Injury' 'permanent Impairment' 'error of Law on the Face of the Record' 'no Evidence' 'relevant and Irrelevant Considerations' 'procedural Fairness' 'apprehended Bias' 'internal Review' 'discretionary Relief']
['traffic Law and Transport' 'administrative Law' 'motor Accidents Compensation' 'judicial Review'] ['medical Assessment' 'psychiatric Injury' 'permanent Impairment' 'error of Law on the Face of the Record' 'no Evidence' 'relevant and Irrelevant Considerations' 'procedural Fairness' 'apprehended Bias' 'internal Review' 'discretionary Relief']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review of a Medical Assessment Certificate and Decision Refusing Referral to a Review Panel Under Motor Accident Legislation / Amended Summons; Application for Extension of Time; Principal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the medical assessor made an error of law on the face of the record by stating that there was no evidence that the plaintiff's current psychiatric condition was caused by the motor accident." 'Whether the medical assessor failed to take into account relevant evidence concerning depressive symptoms and a report of Dr Hussain dated 18 October 2020.' "Whether the medical assessor took into account irrelevant considerations, including the absence of early reports of psychological symptoms and the plaintiff's consultation with his solicitor." 'Whether the medical assessor denied procedural fairness or exhibited prejudgment by forming a preliminary view before clinical examination.' 'Whether time should be extended for filing the summons seeking judicial review of the medical assessment certificate.']

Ratio Decidendi

Time was extended because of the uncertainties facing the claimant, the assumption that judicial review of the initial medical assessment was appropriate, the absence of prejudice, and the absence of objection. The amended summons was dismissed because the impugned 'no evidence' statement, read in context, referred to the absence of persuasive evidence of a causal link between the plaintiff's current psychiatric condition and the motor accident and involved the assessor's evaluative expert judgment, not legal error. The assessor's preliminary view did not show prejudgment or procedural unfairness, particularly where he identified inconsistencies and gave the plaintiff an opportunity to...

Court Disposition

Extension of time granted; amended summons dismissed; plaintiff ordered to pay the first defendant's costs.

Orders

  • ['Extend time for the filing of the summons seeking judicial review of the medical assessment certificate dated 26 July 2021 to 17 December 2021.' 'Dismiss the amended summons.' 'Order that the plaintiff pay the costs of the first defendant in this Court.']