The Court of Appeal held that the review panel committed jurisdictional error by failing to respond to a substantial, clearly articulated argument on causation supported by established evidence, and by misreading significant evidence relevant to its non-medical determination under clause 1.8 of the Permanent Impairment Guidelines. The panel's certificate was set aside and the matter was remitted for redetermination by a differently constituted review panel.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 114 later cases that cite this judgment.
11 of the 114 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.