1A methodology error in a medical assessment does not, without more, provide reasonable cause to suspect the assessment was incorrect in a material respect under s 7.26(5); the gatekeeper must consider whether, on the agreed facts and available evidence, the error could have materially affected the assessment result.
2Where a party concedes facts that establish a minimum assessment outcome (here, DRE III category with minimum 10% WPI) and the medical assessor's result accords with the only available evidence, the delegate asking only whether the methodology was wrong — rather than whether the result was thereby materially incorrect — constitutes answering the wrong question and is an error of law.
3An application for review under s 7.26 does not require the continuation of a medical dispute; however, the absence of any evidence from the applicant for review suggesting the assessment result was actually wrong may support a Jones v Dunkel inference and a finding of legal unreasonableness in the gatekeeper's referral decision.
