A motorist who swerved to avoid a bird strike and crashed into a row of parked cars has been denied compensation under New South Wales’ no-fault motor accident scheme. The Personal Injury Commission ruled that the driver, Mr Mousawi, was not entitled to recover statutory benefits from NRMA following the incident, which occurred when a bird struck his windscreen and caused him to lose control of his vehicle.
The decision, Mousawi v Insurance Australia Ltd t/as NRMA Insurance [2025] NSWPIC 557, was handed down on November 3, 2025. It examined whether the insurer of the parked vehicles could be held liable under the no-fault provisions of the Motor Accident Injuries Act 2017, which provides limited benefits to people injured in motor vehicle accidents regardless of fault.
According to the Commission, the owners of the parked vehicles could not be considered to have “used or operated” their cars in a way that contributed to the collision, as the vehicles were stationary and inactive when the crash occurred. Because of this, their insurer could not be held responsible for the resulting damage or injuries under the statutory scheme.
The ruling turned on section 5.4 of the Motor Accident Injuries Act, which excludes people who cause an accident through their own act or omission from receiving no-fault benefits. Although the bird strike was the initial trigger, the Commission found that the accident was ultimately caused by Mr Mousawi’s own driving manoeuvre. His decision to swerve, even as an instinctive reaction to an unexpected event, was deemed to be the act that brought about the collision.
As a result, he was not entitled to recover benefits under the Act’s Part 5 provisions. The decision highlights that the no-fault scheme does not extend to situations where the claimant’s own driving caused the accident, even if the initial event was beyond their control.
Legal commentators say the case clarifies the limits of the no-fault scheme and reinforces the importance of causation in determining eligibility for compensation. For insurers such as NRMA, it provides further guidance on the boundaries of liability for stationary vehicles under the Motor Accident Injuries Act. For motorists, it serves as a reminder that even an apparently unavoidable reaction may not entitle them to statutory benefits under NSW’s no-fault system.