Insurance Australia Limited trading as NRMA Insurance v Keneally

The matter before the court involved a claim by a claimant against Insurance Australia Limited, trading as NRMA Insurance, following a motor vehicle accident. The primary dispute centred on the assessment of the claimant's permanent impairment resulting from injuries sustained in the accident. The injuries in question included scarring to the right hip following revisionary hip replacement surgery and a degloving injury to both thumbs. The court was tasked with determining the extent of the claimant's permanent impairment and the appropriate compensation to be awarded by the insurer.

The court had to address several key legal issues, including the proper assessment of the claimant's injuries, the capacity in which the medical assessor performed the evaluation, and the application of relevant impairment guides to the injuries. A significant point of contention was whether the claimant had indeed sustained a degloving injury to either thumb, as well as the presence and extent of scarring on the right hip. The court also needed to consider the appropriate method for assessing the combined impairment and whether the previous assessment was accurate or required adjustment.

The court found that the claimant did not sustain a degloving injury to either thumb and there was no scarring to either thumb. The right hip scarring was assessed under Table 18 of the Permanent Impairment Guides using the principle of best fit, resulting in a 2% whole person impairment. The court concluded that a new combined impairment certificate should be issued, certifying a combined permanent impairment of 12%. This assessment took into account the correct evaluation of the injuries and the application of the appropriate impairment guides.

The final orders of the court mandated that a new combined impairment certificate be issued, reflecting a combined permanent impairment of 12%. The insurer was directed to adjust the compensation payable to the claimant in accordance with this new assessment. The court's decision provided clarity on the nature and extent of the claimant's injuries and the appropriate method for calculating permanent impairment, ensuring a fair outcome based on the evidence presented.