Mr Carrim's attorneys

There were letters written to Mr Carrim's attorneys requesting him to avail himself for an independent medical assessment, but there was no known positive response; instead the Commission faced vehement opposition to the possibility of such an assessment.

“at least two letters... were written to Mr Carrim's attorneys requesting him to avail himself for an assessment by an independent doctor. Initially there was no response and was there a response the second time around? ... what we got was the vehement argument by you against that as a possibility”

CHAIRPERSON recalls more than one letter was written to Mr Carrim's attorneys asking him to avail for an independent assessment, initially no response, then vehement opposition from ADV PREMHID.

“More than one letter was written to Mr Carrim 's attorneys requesting him to avail himself for an assessment by an independent doctor. Initially there was no response and was there a response the second time around? I am not sure, but here in open session in this Commission what we got was the vehement argument by you against that as a possibility.”

CHAIRPERSON states no assessment voluntarily received from Mr Carrim or his attorneys despite multiple requests.

“If Mr Carrim was prepared at all to subject himself to the assessment we should by now have received something from him or his attorneys saying that here I am, I am willing to subject myself to that assessment that the Commission's attorneys have asked for more than once.”

Mr Carrim's attorneys appear to believe that a postponement is always available upon request, as evidenced by repeated attempts to gain postponements.

“Mr Carrim's attorneys seem to believe that a postponement is available for the asking”

Mr Carrim's attorneys improperly believe that postponements for the hearing are available upon request, exemplified by a 13 May 2026 letter attempting to postpone the next hearing without sufficient medical evidence.

“Mr Carrim's attorneys seem to believe that a postponement is available for the asking. One example of that is at page 67 of the correspondence bundle ... a letter dated 13 May 2026 from Mr Carrim's attorneys ... this is again an attempt to get a postponement of the next hearing ... this report is highly personal, suffice to state that our client has been laid off for at least 8 to 12 weeks, and that was all. No medical certificate or report or note or anything accompanied this.”

A medical report supporting the postponement request was not initially provided and had to be obtained by the Commission after requests from Mr Carrim's attorneys.

“It required requests from the attorneys for the Commission to obtain the necessary medical report to underpin the postponement request that was made.”