Where an insurer has accepted liability under the Motor Accidents Compensation Act 1999 (NSW), the claims assessment process is not a 'non-binding arbitration' — the assessment of damages is binding on the insurer under ss 94(1)(a) and 95(2). Claims Assessors' evaluative determinations of whether a claim is 'not suitable for assessment' under s 92(1)(b) are subject only to judicial review on orthodox grounds (failure to treat mandatory considerations as fundamental and focal elements, Wednesbury unreasonableness), not merits review. The differences between the inquisitorial assessment process and adversarial court proceedings (no oath, no subpoenas, limited cross-examination) are relevant but not determinative factors in the suitability assessment.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 7 later cases that cite this judgment.
1 of the 7 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.