(iii) Dr Ghahreman, whilst initially recording a head injury with loss of consciousness recorded that "she had lower back pain after her surgery when she stared to weight bear. Also she noticed neck pain when she was sitting after her surgery;"

(iv) Dr Davies with the assistance of an interpreter obtained history the neck symptoms occurred several months after the ankle injury and as a result of using the crutches, and

(v) only hours after the injury, the applicant informed those attending to her at Blacktown Hospital she did not strike her head and lose consciousness or sustain any other injury apart from that to her ankle. The Glasgow Coma Score at the time of emergency triage and admission was recorded to be 15, (full consciousness);

(c) additionally:

(i) the initial certificate of capacity did not refer to neck injury, and

(ii) symptoms of neck complaint were not documented until

27 June 2023;

(d) applicant's counsel emphasised the uncertainty of the context in which the hospital notes were generated, questioned their accuracy and cautioned on overreliance. I acknowledge authorities indicate care should be taken not to place too much weight on the clinical notes of treating doctors, given their primary concern is with treatment.[39] I also acknowledge that the absence of contemporaneous evidence is not determinative on the issue of causation where there is other evidence,[40] however this is not relevant where credibility is an issue. I find that the hospital notes are thorough and the applicant was assessed by a number of personnel all who took a consistent record of "no headstrike" or "loss of consciousness" and no other injury apart from the ankle fracture, all being recorded within a few hours of the fall. Further, I note that the Glasgow Coma score was normal. The records show the hospital staff were thorough in their assessments. Given the notes were generated within only a few hours of the fall and are consistent throughout (despite a number of different personnel making entries), I have no reason to doubt the accuracy. I prefer this evidence because it was taken only hours after injury from the applicant who affirmatively reported on a number of occasions that she did not suffer head strike, experience loss of consciousness and was not impaired given the Glasgow coma scale testing score of 15. It follows, that the causation theory relied upon by Dr Khong and Dr Gehr and to a certain extent Dr Ghahreman are based on an inaccurate history, likely to have been subconsciously generated given the lapse of time. I find their opinions have limited probative value, and

(e) I note English is not the applicant's first language, and whilst this was not a ground relied upon by the applicant in submissions, I raise this as language barriers are an essential element in the assessment of credibility. I note her qualified specialists did not have benefit of an interpreter, however the insurer's qualified specialist, Dr Davis did. There is nothing in the hospital notes which would lead me to find there was any confusion or difficulties when relaying the effects of her injury to hospital staff or paramedics. Further, I cannot ignore that the applicant was engaged in the work of a disability support officer which requires a base line level of comprehension, clearly evident from her past representations.