A claims assessor under the Motor Accidents Compensation Act 1999 (NSW) must explain the actual path of reasoning in sufficient detail to enable a court to determine whether the decision involves an error of law, even though the standard is less demanding than that imposed on courts. Merely referring to conflicting evidence, asserting it has been taken into account, and stating a conclusion without explaining why a particular conclusion was reached is insufficient. However, where a gap in the reasons can be filled as a matter of necessary inference on a fair reading, the obligation may be discharged.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 47 later cases that cite this judgment.
4 of the 47 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.