AAI Ltd t/as AAMI v Chan

AAI Ltd trading as AAMI (the appellant) appealed to the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of New South Wales against a decision of the primary judge who had found that the "proper officer" under the *Motor Accidents Compensation Act 1999* (NSW) had made a reviewable error. The dispute concerned an application for a further assessment of a claim, where the proper officer had refused to order such an assessment on the basis that the additional medical opinions provided were not capable of having a material effect on the outcome of the previous assessment.

The Court of Appeal was required to determine whether the primary judge had erred in finding that the proper officer's decision constituted a reviewable error. Specifically, the court considered whether there was a jurisdictional error or an error of law on the face of the record, which would render the proper officer's decision amenable to judicial review.

The Court of Appeal reasoned that the proper officer's decision involved an assessment of whether the further medical opinions were "additional relevant information" and whether this information was "capable of having a material effect on the outcome of the previous assessment." The court found that the primary judge had erred in concluding that the proper officer's decision was reviewable. The appeal judges held that the proper officer's assessment of the materiality of the additional information was a question of fact and degree, and that the primary judge had incorrectly substituted their own view for that of the proper officer. The court applied the principle that judicial review is generally concerned with the legality of a decision, not its merits, and that errors of law on the face of the record are required for review.

The appeal was allowed, and the orders made by the primary judge were set aside. The summons filed by the respondent was dismissed, and the respondent was ordered to pay the appellant's costs of both the appeal and the proceedings at first instance.