Under s 40(2) of the Motor Accidents Act 1988 (NSW), the first sentence requires a full account of the conduct of both the claimant and persons acting on the claimant's behalf, but the second sentence's test of satisfactoriness (whether a reasonable person in the position of the claimant would have been justified in experiencing the delay) is directed solely at the claimant personally. For child claimants with legal incapacity, this means the 'satisfactory explanation' threshold will almost always be met regardless of solicitor negligence, with the real control being the discretionary stage. Where an insurer has denied all liability under s 52(2), compliance with ss 48 and 50A is not required as a precondition to commencing proceedings.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 22 later cases that cite this judgment.
5 of the 22 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.