Practical review
What to check in this situation
- State each disputed finding, the passage in the decision and the evidence that answers it.
- Separate liability, treatment, PIAWE, work capacity and permanent impairment issues.
- Ask for a written review outcome that gives reasons and identifies the material relied on.
Records that may help
Keep the original notice, review request, delivery receipt, new evidence, insurer acknowledgment and review outcome.
Next procedural step
Do not let an informal review request obscure a PIC, payment or medical appeal deadline.
What this document or stage means
A useful review request identifies the exact decision, answers each reason and states the outcome sought. Sending the same material again without explaining the error rarely addresses the real dispute.
Who prepares or controls it
- The worker or legal representative requests review and can provide further evidence or submissions.
- The insurer must arrange the review and give a written outcome. The reviewer should be a person other than the original decision-maker.
- The review outcome is still an insurer decision. It is not a PIC determination.
Why it is part of the claim
- The worker asked the insurer to reconsider all or part of a section 78 decision, work capacity decision, PIAWE decision or other reviewable decision.
- New evidence answers a factual or medical reason relied on by the insurer.
- For a relevant-conduct primary psychological injury claim, the worker must first request internal review before the dispute can proceed to PIC or IRC.
What to check
Decision being reviewed
Record the decision date, claim number, effective date and each part disputed. A combined notice may contain more than one decision.
Grounds for review
Match each alleged error to the document that answers it. Separate factual error, medical disagreement, calculation error and legal interpretation.
New material
List each new report or record and explain why it matters. Check that the reviewer considered it rather than merely listing it.
Outcome and reasons
The review should say what is confirmed, changed or withdrawn, why, and when any payment or claim status change takes effect.
Mistakes or gaps to look for
- Reviewing only one part of a combined decision when weekly payments, liability and treatment are all affected.
- A reviewer repeating the first decision without addressing new medical or wage evidence.
- No clear request for the practical outcome, such as acceptance of liability, restoration of payments or correction of PIAWE.
- Assuming an ordinary internal review must finish before a PIC application can be lodged.
- Missing the separate mandatory-review rule for relevant-conduct psychological injury claims.
Evidence to keep
- The complete original decision notice, attachments and proof of when it was received.
- A short issue table matching each insurer reason to the worker’s response and evidence.
- Treating reports, clinical notes, wage records, duties evidence or witness material relevant to the disputed reason.
- The written review request, proof of delivery and all insurer acknowledgements.
- The review decision and any corrected payment calculation or acceptance notice.
What happens next
- If the decision changes, check whether arrears, treatment approval or claim records are corrected in practice.
- If it is confirmed, the worker may consider the appropriate PIC pathway. A relevant-conduct issue may first require an IRC certificate before other PIC issues can proceed.
- An IRO complaint concerns insurer conduct and administration; it does not replace a PIC application where a legal determination is required.
Timing and deadlines
- Section 287A provides that a requested ordinary internal review must be conducted and the worker notified within 14 days.
- The approved SIRA decision-notice summary states that an ordinary review may be requested at any time, but payment effective dates and separate dispute deadlines can make early advice important.
- For a relevant-conduct claim, the insurer must provide review information within two business days and notify the outcome within 14 days under the current special process.
When legal advice may be useful
- Advice may help identify whether review is worth using or whether a direct PIC application is safer for an ordinary dispute.
- A lawyer can frame the issues, obtain the evidence the insurer’s reasons actually require and assess whether ILARS funding may be available, subject to IRO approval.
Illustrative example
Illustration: treatment and capacity reasons in one notice
An insurer relies on one IME report to say surgery is not reasonably necessary and the worker can return to full hours. The review request separates those issues, supplies the surgeon’s response for treatment and the nominated treating doctor’s hours and task restrictions for capacity.
- Ask the reviewer to decide each issue separately.
- Identify the precise passages in the IME report said to be wrong.
- State the requested treatment and weekly-payment outcome.
Common questions
Must I request internal review before going to PIC?
Generally no for an ordinary claim. The worker may seek review or go directly to PIC. Internal review is mandatory for the post-1 July 2026 relevant-conduct psychological injury pathway before PIC or IRC.
How long does the insurer have to complete the review?
The ordinary section 287A review period is 14 days after the request. The relevant-conduct process also uses a 14-day outcome period, with additional early information requirements.
Does requesting review keep weekly payments running?
Not by itself. A specific statutory stay may apply to a qualifying work capacity dispute accepted by PIC before the notice period expires. Do not assume every review request suspends the decision.
Can I add new evidence?
Yes. Explain what the new evidence proves and how it answers the reason in the decision, rather than sending an unexplained bundle.
Need help checking a claim document?
Send the decision, report or plan with a short explanation of what has changed. We can assess the dispute and whether an ILARS funding application may be available, subject to eligibility, merits and IRO approval.
Related claim and dispute guides
Legal service provider
NSW workers compensation help from Stephen Young Lawyers
NSW Work Injury Claim is the workers compensation service of Stephen Young Lawyers. Stephen Young Lawyers provides the legal service. Stephen Young Lawyers.
Stephen Young Lawyers was established in 2012. The firm is led by Stephen Young, Principal Solicitor and Accredited Specialist in Personal Injury Law.
Workers across New South Wales can arrange telephone or video appointments. In-person appointments can be arranged at the Sydney office when appropriate.
NSW Work Injury Claim enquiries: (02) 7233 3661
- Content publisher:
- NSW Work Injury Claim
- Published:
- Last legally reviewed:
Key legal sources
- Workers Compensation Act 1987 (NSW)
- SIRA workers compensation
- IRO legal assistance for injured workers
- Personal Injury Commission
- SIRA approved workers compensation decision-notice summary, version 2
- SIRA dispute resolution pathways
- SIRA psychological injury claims guidance, updated July 2026
- Workplace Injury Management and Workers Compensation Act 1998, section 287A
This information is general in nature and is not legal advice. You should obtain advice about your own circumstances.
Last legally reviewed: . This page provides general information about NSW workers compensation procedure. It is not legal advice, and the correct response may depend on the document, injury date and dispute.