Carroll v United Super Pty Ltd [2018] NSWSC 403

Carroll v United Super Pty Ltd [2018] NSWSC 403

The Trustee's first decision was vitiated because it recognised that a vocational assessment would make for a more complete assessment but failed to obtain that relevant material before concluding that the plaintiff could perform sedentary work. Hannover's decisions were vitiated because its process misstated or omitted relevant medical evidence, relied on unsupported assumptions about the plaintiff's capacity to manage his business or perform alternative work, drew an unreasonable adverse conclusion from medically approved low-impact activity, and failed to give adequate reasons when maintaining its decision. On the Court's own assessment, the plaintiff was totally and permanently...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
04 April 2018
Procedural Posture
Equity Proceeding Challenging Trustee and Insurer Decisions Declining a Total and Permanent Disablement Benefit Claim / Principal Judgment After Hearing
Outcome
Plaintiff successful; the Court found the plaintiff totally and permanently disabled within the Policy as at 9 March 2012 and entitled to orders that Hannover pay $104,000 to the Trustee for distribution to him.
Legal Topics
['total and Permanent Disablement' 'group Life Insurance Policy' 'superannuation Trustee Duties' 'insurer Duty of Utmost Good Faith' 'education Training or Experience Clause' 'judicial Review of Trustee and Insurer Decisions' 'declaratory Relief']
['insurance' 'superannuation' 'equity' 'trusts'] ['total and Permanent Disablement' 'group Life Insurance Policy' 'superannuation Trustee Duties' 'insurer Duty of Utmost Good Faith' 'education Training or Experience Clause' 'judicial Review of Trustee and Insurer Decisions' 'declaratory 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

Equity Proceeding Challenging Trustee and Insurer Decisions Declining a Total and Permanent Disablement Benefit Claim / Principal Judgment After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the Trustee failed to act in good faith on a real and genuine consideration of the material before it in declining the plaintiff's claim." 'Whether Hannover acted with utmost good faith and reasonably in forming its opinion that the plaintiff was not totally and permanently disabled under the Policy.' "Whether the Trustee's and Hannover's decisions declining the plaintiff's claim could be set aside." 'Whether the Court should itself determine whether the plaintiff was totally and permanently disabled under the Policy.' 'Whether the plaintiff was unlikely ever to be able to engage in any Regular Remuneration Work for which he was reasonably fitted by education, training or experience.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Trustee's first decision was vitiated because it recognised that a vocational assessment would make for a more complete assessment but failed to obtain that relevant material before concluding that the plaintiff could perform sedentary work. Hannover's decisions were vitiated because its process misstated or omitted relevant medical evidence, relied on unsupported assumptions about the plaintiff's capacity to manage his business or perform alternative work, drew an unreasonable adverse conclusion from medically approved low-impact activity, and failed to give adequate reasons when maintaining its decision. On the Court's own assessment, the plaintiff was totally and permanently...

Court Disposition

Plaintiff successful; the Court found the plaintiff totally and permanently disabled within the Policy as at 9 March 2012 and entitled to orders that Hannover pay $104,000 to the Trustee for distribution to him.

Orders

  • ['Direct the parties to bring in short minutes of order to give effect to these reasons.' 'List the proceedings for mention at 9.30am on 10 May 2018 for any argument on costs or other consequential issues.' 'Liberty to apply.']