Ackling v QBE Insurance (Australia) Limited

Ackling brought a claim against QBE Insurance (Australia) Limited in the Federal Circuit Court, seeking prerogative relief in relation to the assessment of his permanent impairment following a motor accident. The dispute centred on the medical evaluation of Ackling's psychiatric injury, with the medical assessor and review panel concluding that his psychiatric injury was not caused by the motor accident. Ackling argued that the medical assessor was not entitled to make a determination that the injury was not caused by the motor accident and that the wrong test of causation was applied.

The court had to determine whether the medical assessor was entitled to conclude that Ackling's psychiatric injury was not caused by the motor accident and, if so, whether the correct test of causation was applied. The court found that the medical assessor was indeed entitled to make such a determination, provided it was based on the appropriate evidence and reasoning. Furthermore, the court identified that QBE Insurance conceded that the wrong test of causation had been applied, which necessitated a reassessment of Ackling's claim.

In light of the concession and the identification of the incorrect test of causation, the court allowed the appeal and remitted the matter to the review panel for reconsideration in accordance with the correct legal principles. The court emphasised that the medical assessor's determination was permissible, but the process required adherence to the appropriate test of causation. The final orders included the allowance of the appeal, the direction for the review panel to reassess Ackling's claim with the correct test of causation, and the costs order in favour of Ackling.