Mulcahy v NRMA Insurance Limited & Ors [2018] NSWCA 189

Mulcahy v NRMA Insurance Limited & Ors [2018] NSWCA 189

The claims assessor's adoption of scenario 1 from the accountant's report incorporated its contents and reasoning into the record, satisfying the statutory requirement for brief reasons under s 94(5) of the Motor Accidents Compensation Act 1999 (NSW). The path of reasoning for the calculation of future economic loss was sufficiently exposed, and no error of law on the face of the record was demonstrated.

Parties
Appellant: Keiran Mulcahy; 1st Respondent: NRMA Insurance Limited; 2nd Respondent: Gary Victor Patterson (in his capacity as Claims Assessor of the State Insurance Regulatory Authority of New South Wales); 3rd Respondent: State Insurance Regulatory Authority of New South Wales
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 August 2018
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Judicial Review, Motor Accidents Compensation Act 1999 (nsw), Error of Law on the Face of the Record, Adequacy of Reasons, Incorporation by Reference, Assessment of Damages
Administrative Law Judicial Review Motor Accidents Compensation Act 1999 (nsw) Error of Law on the Face of the Record Adequacy of Reasons Incorporation by Reference Assessment of Damages

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 4 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Keiran Mulcahy

Appellant

NRMA Insurance Limited

1st Respondent

Gary Victor Patterson (in his capacity as Claims Assessor of the State Insurance Regulatory Authority of New South Wales)

2nd Respondent

State Insurance Regulatory Authority of New South Wales

3rd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claims assessor sufficiently disclosed reasoning for future economic loss assessment under Motor Accidents Compensation Act 1999 (NSW)
  2. 2 Whether incorporation of accountant's report into reasons satisfies statutory brevity requirements
  3. 3 Whether failure to explain calculation constitutes error of law on the face of the record

Ratio Decidendi

The claims assessor's adoption of scenario 1 from the accountant's report incorporated its contents and reasoning into the record, satisfying the statutory requirement for brief reasons under s 94(5) of the Motor Accidents Compensation Act 1999 (NSW). The path of reasoning for the calculation of future economic loss was sufficiently exposed, and no error of law on the face of the record was demonstrated.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Set aside the orders of Adamson J of 3 November 2017
  • In lieu thereof order that the summons filed by the first respondent on 19 July 2017 be dismissed