AAMI Limited v Cirevska

The case before the Supreme Court was an application for judicial review by AAMI Limited against a decision of a claims assessor under the Motor Accidents Compensation Act 1999. The claimant, Cirevska, had sought compensation for a degree of permanent impairment exceeding 10 percent, which was allegedly exacerbated by an asthmatic condition due to an accident. The insurer contested the claim, arguing that the medical assessment was flawed as the patient's history was incorrect in a material respect. Despite this, the general assessment proceeded, and the claims assessor independently assessed the causation of the asthma.

The court examined several legal issues, including whether the claims assessor had erred in finding the medical assessment certificate conclusive for all purposes, whether there was an error in granting an award of gratuitous care, and whether there was a denial of procedural fairness or failure to exercise a statutory duty. The court found that while the conclusion of conclusiveness was incorrect, it was immaterial to the independent finding that the asthma was exacerbated by the accident. The evidence presented was deemed sufficient for the claims assessor to make the finding. Additionally, there was no denial of procedural fairness, and the general assessor was not obligated to refer the certificate for further assessment. The insurer was also precluded from objecting to the award of gratuitous care, having conceded the point before the claims assessor.

The court concluded that the error, if any, was not established. The insurer's application for judicial review was dismissed, and no orders were made in favour of the applicant. The principle of finality applied, barring the insurer from further challenging the claims assessor's decision.