# Best TAC and transport accident lawyers in Melbourne

> Ranking of 17 Melbourne TAC and transport accident law firms, scored out of 100 on IME disputes, fee protection, senior access and impairment benefits.

- Source: https://lawfirmrankings.com.au/best-tac-lawyers-melbourne
- Publisher: Law Firm Rankings (lawfirmrankings.com.au)
- Last reviewed: August 2026 (2026-08-15)
- Scoring model: https://lawfirmrankings.com.au/methodology

## Summary

A TAC claim can be decided by a single independent medical examination. This guide weights how well each firm disputes IME reports and unfair decisions, alongside fee protection, direct senior access, and experience at VCAT, the Medical Panels and the County Court.

**Highest rated:** Burt & Davies Lawyers — 79.8/100. 17 firms assessed.

## Criteria and weights applied in this category

| Criterion | Weight | What it measures |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Cost protection and fee transparency | 18% | No Win No Fee terms, whether a capped-fee promise is given in writing, and how clearly deductions are explained up front. |
| Direct senior access and communication | 18% | Tailored advice from the lawyer running the file, against team-based or boiler-plate file handling. Response and update standards. |
| Disputing IME reports and decisions | 14% | Experience challenging independent medical examiner reports and overturning unfair or unjust insurer decisions. |
| Claims process, start to finish | 13% | Whether the firm helps from the initiating notification onward, or only takes a file once the claim is running. |
| Contested claims experience | 13% | Track record taking disputed claims through conciliation, the Medical Panels, VCAT and the Magistrates', County and Supreme Courts. |
| Maximising compensation | 12% | Whether the firm works to a documented approach for identifying every head of loss rather than settling on the first reasonable offer. |
| Impairment benefits and WPI | 6% | Capability assessing Whole Person Impairment, selecting assessors, and advising on what must be factored into an impairment claim. |
| Client experience and reviews | 6% | Public client reviews, complaint patterns, and how the firm handles a claim that goes wrong. |

Weights total 100%. Each firm is rated out of 10 per criterion; the weighted result is expressed out of 100.

## Ranking

| Rank | Firm | Score / 100 | Website |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 1 | Burt & Davies Lawyers | 79.8 | burtdavies.com.au |
| 2 | Karlos Lawyers | 79.3 | karloslaw.com.au |
| 3 | Arnold Thomas & Becker | 78.8 | atblegal.com.au |
| 4 | Maurice Blackburn Lawyers | 78.7 | mauriceblackburn.com.au |
| 5 | Slater and Gordon Lawyers | 77.1 | slatergordon.com.au |
| 6 | Henry Carus + Associates | 77.0 | henrycarus.com.au |
| 7 | Fittipaldi Injury Lawyers | 76.7 | fittipaldilawyers.com.au |
| 8 | Gordon Legal | 76.2 | gordonlegal.com.au |
| 9 | Maxiom Injury Lawyers | 75.4 | maxiomlaw.com.au |
| 10 | Robinson Gill Lawyers | 73.5 | robinsongill.com.au |
| 11 | Zaparas Lawyers | 73.4 | zaparas.com.au |
| 12 | Stringer Clark Lawyers | 72.6 | stringerclark.com.au |
| 13 | Guardian Injury Law | 72.5 | guardianinjurylaw.com.au |
| 14 | Littles Lawyers | 71.5 | littles.law |
| 15 | Polaris Injury Lawyers | 71.2 | polarislawyers.com.au |
| 16 | Law Partners Personal Injury Lawyers | 69.6 | lawpartners.com.au |
| 17 | LHD Lawyers | 68.2 | lhd.com.au |

## Assessment of each firm

### 1. Burt & Davies Lawyers — 79.8/100

Dedicated TAC practice with focused transport-accident knowledge. Does not act in other personal injury areas.

| Criterion | Rating / 10 | Weight |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Cost protection and fee transparency | 8.6 | 18% |
| Direct senior access and communication | 8.6 | 18% |
| Disputing IME reports and decisions | 7.4 | 14% |
| Claims process, start to finish | 7.6 | 13% |
| Contested claims experience | 7.2 | 13% |
| Maximising compensation | 7.6 | 12% |
| Impairment benefits and WPI | 8.6 | 6% |
| Client experience and reviews | 8.2 | 6% |

Profile: https://lawfirmrankings.com.au/firms/burt-davies-lawyers

### 2. Karlos Lawyers — 79.3/100

Boutique Melbourne practice. The lawyer you meet runs the file. Written Lionshare fee guarantee, advice from the initiating notification onward, and a contested-claims practice across the Medical Panels and the County Court.

| Criterion | Rating / 10 | Weight |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Cost protection and fee transparency | 7.1 | 18% |
| Direct senior access and communication | 8.4 | 18% |
| Disputing IME reports and decisions | 8.0 | 14% |
| Claims process, start to finish | 7.4 | 13% |
| Contested claims experience | 8.0 | 13% |
| Maximising compensation | 8.4 | 12% |
| Impairment benefits and WPI | 9.2 | 6% |
| Client experience and reviews | 7.7 | 6% |

Profile: https://lawfirmrankings.com.au/firms/karlos-lawyers

### 3. Arnold Thomas & Becker — 78.8/100

Long-established Victorian firm across WorkCover and TAC, with solid impairment work. Results are inconsistent across branches: the standard of the file depends on which office and team has conduct of it.

| Criterion | Rating / 10 | Weight |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Cost protection and fee transparency | 7.2 | 18% |
| Direct senior access and communication | 7.6 | 18% |
| Disputing IME reports and decisions | 7.6 | 14% |
| Claims process, start to finish | 8.4 | 13% |
| Contested claims experience | 8.0 | 13% |
| Maximising compensation | 7.9 | 12% |
| Impairment benefits and WPI | 9.6 | 6% |
| Client experience and reviews | 8.2 | 6% |

Profile: https://lawfirmrankings.com.au/firms/arnold-thomas-becker

### 4. Maurice Blackburn Lawyers — 78.7/100

Large national firm with deep litigation resources and a strong reported-decision record. Scale means files are commonly run by junior solicitors rather than the senior practitioners whose names attract the work, so experience on the file itself is often thinner than the firm's national presence suggests.

| Criterion | Rating / 10 | Weight |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Cost protection and fee transparency | 7.3 | 18% |
| Direct senior access and communication | 5.6 | 18% |
| Disputing IME reports and decisions | 8.6 | 14% |
| Claims process, start to finish | 8.4 | 13% |
| Contested claims experience | 9.6 | 13% |
| Maximising compensation | 8.6 | 12% |
| Impairment benefits and WPI | 8.6 | 6% |
| Client experience and reviews | 7.6 | 6% |

Profile: https://lawfirmrankings.com.au/firms/maurice-blackburn-lawyers

### 5. Slater and Gordon Lawyers — 77.1/100

National presence and substantial court experience. The high-volume model typically assigns junior solicitors to day-to-day conduct, so clients often do not get the experience the firm's size implies.

| Criterion | Rating / 10 | Weight |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Cost protection and fee transparency | 6.6 | 18% |
| Direct senior access and communication | 5.2 | 18% |
| Disputing IME reports and decisions | 9.5 | 14% |
| Claims process, start to finish | 8.4 | 13% |
| Contested claims experience | 9.5 | 13% |
| Maximising compensation | 8.4 | 12% |
| Impairment benefits and WPI | 8.4 | 6% |
| Client experience and reviews | 7.0 | 6% |

Profile: https://lawfirmrankings.com.au/firms/slater-and-gordon-lawyers

### 6. Henry Carus + Associates — 77.0/100

Mid-sized Melbourne injury practice with consistent client feedback and good communication standards. Less depth on federal schemes.

| Criterion | Rating / 10 | Weight |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Cost protection and fee transparency | 7.4 | 18% |
| Direct senior access and communication | 7.8 | 18% |
| Disputing IME reports and decisions | 7.6 | 14% |
| Claims process, start to finish | 7.8 | 13% |
| Contested claims experience | 7.6 | 13% |
| Maximising compensation | 7.7 | 12% |
| Impairment benefits and WPI | 7.6 | 6% |
| Client experience and reviews | 8.6 | 6% |

Profile: https://lawfirmrankings.com.au/firms/henry-carus-associates

### 7. Fittipaldi Injury Lawyers — 76.7/100

Smaller practice with genuine partner contact and clear fee terms. Litigation depth is narrower than the national firms.

| Criterion | Rating / 10 | Weight |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Cost protection and fee transparency | 7.6 | 18% |
| Direct senior access and communication | 8.0 | 18% |
| Disputing IME reports and decisions | 7.4 | 14% |
| Claims process, start to finish | 7.7 | 13% |
| Contested claims experience | 7.4 | 13% |
| Maximising compensation | 7.6 | 12% |
| Impairment benefits and WPI | 7.5 | 6% |
| Client experience and reviews | 8.4 | 6% |

Profile: https://lawfirmrankings.com.au/firms/fittipaldi-injury-lawyers

### 8. Gordon Legal — 76.2/100

Litigation-forward firm comfortable running contested matters. Personal injury sits alongside several other practice areas.

| Criterion | Rating / 10 | Weight |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Cost protection and fee transparency | 7.0 | 18% |
| Direct senior access and communication | 7.4 | 18% |
| Disputing IME reports and decisions | 7.8 | 14% |
| Claims process, start to finish | 7.6 | 13% |
| Contested claims experience | 8.4 | 13% |
| Maximising compensation | 7.8 | 12% |
| Impairment benefits and WPI | 7.6 | 6% |
| Client experience and reviews | 7.8 | 6% |

Profile: https://lawfirmrankings.com.au/firms/gordon-legal

### 9. Maxiom Injury Lawyers — 75.4/100

High-volume injury practice with accessible intake and plain fee terms. Individual files may not receive the depth of resources a more tightly held matter would.

| Criterion | Rating / 10 | Weight |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Cost protection and fee transparency | 7.2 | 18% |
| Direct senior access and communication | 6.6 | 18% |
| Disputing IME reports and decisions | 6.8 | 14% |
| Claims process, start to finish | 7.0 | 13% |
| Contested claims experience | 8.4 | 13% |
| Maximising compensation | 9.0 | 12% |
| Impairment benefits and WPI | 9.7 | 6% |
| Client experience and reviews | 7.4 | 6% |

Profile: https://lawfirmrankings.com.au/firms/maxiom-injury-lawyers

### 10. Robinson Gill Lawyers — 73.5/100

Melbourne firm with a substantial police-misconduct and civil-rights practice alongside personal injury work. WorkCover and TAC files sit beside that specialty rather than defining the whole of the practice.

| Criterion | Rating / 10 | Weight |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Cost protection and fee transparency | 7.0 | 18% |
| Direct senior access and communication | 7.4 | 18% |
| Disputing IME reports and decisions | 7.2 | 14% |
| Claims process, start to finish | 7.5 | 13% |
| Contested claims experience | 7.6 | 13% |
| Maximising compensation | 7.4 | 12% |
| Impairment benefits and WPI | 7.4 | 6% |
| Client experience and reviews | 7.6 | 6% |

Profile: https://lawfirmrankings.com.au/firms/robinson-gill-lawyers

### 11. Zaparas Lawyers — 73.4/100

High-volume Victorian injury practice with a broad suburban footprint. File load is heavy, and the resources applied to each matter are not always commensurate with the complexity of the claim.

| Criterion | Rating / 10 | Weight |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Cost protection and fee transparency | 7.0 | 18% |
| Direct senior access and communication | 6.2 | 18% |
| Disputing IME reports and decisions | 7.6 | 14% |
| Claims process, start to finish | 7.9 | 13% |
| Contested claims experience | 7.8 | 13% |
| Maximising compensation | 7.8 | 12% |
| Impairment benefits and WPI | 8.0 | 6% |
| Client experience and reviews | 7.4 | 6% |

Profile: https://lawfirmrankings.com.au/firms/zaparas-lawyers

### 12. Stringer Clark Lawyers — 72.6/100

Regional Victorian strength and steady WorkCover volume. Metropolitan contested work is less prominent.

| Criterion | Rating / 10 | Weight |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Cost protection and fee transparency | 6.8 | 18% |
| Direct senior access and communication | 7.0 | 18% |
| Disputing IME reports and decisions | 7.4 | 14% |
| Claims process, start to finish | 7.4 | 13% |
| Contested claims experience | 7.8 | 13% |
| Maximising compensation | 7.4 | 12% |
| Impairment benefits and WPI | 7.4 | 6% |
| Client experience and reviews | 7.2 | 6% |

Profile: https://lawfirmrankings.com.au/firms/stringer-clark-lawyers

### 13. Guardian Injury Law — 72.5/100

Specialist injury practice with a service-led approach and direct lawyer contact on smaller files.

| Criterion | Rating / 10 | Weight |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Cost protection and fee transparency | 7.2 | 18% |
| Direct senior access and communication | 7.6 | 18% |
| Disputing IME reports and decisions | 7.0 | 14% |
| Claims process, start to finish | 7.2 | 13% |
| Contested claims experience | 7.0 | 13% |
| Maximising compensation | 7.2 | 12% |
| Impairment benefits and WPI | 7.0 | 6% |
| Client experience and reviews | 8.0 | 6% |

Profile: https://lawfirmrankings.com.au/firms/guardian-injury-law

### 14. Littles Lawyers — 71.5/100

Interstate-founded firm building a Victorian presence. Clear fee messaging, shallower local court history.

| Criterion | Rating / 10 | Weight |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Cost protection and fee transparency | 7.4 | 18% |
| Direct senior access and communication | 7.2 | 18% |
| Disputing IME reports and decisions | 7.0 | 14% |
| Claims process, start to finish | 7.1 | 13% |
| Contested claims experience | 6.8 | 13% |
| Maximising compensation | 7.2 | 12% |
| Impairment benefits and WPI | 7.0 | 6% |
| Client experience and reviews | 7.6 | 6% |

Profile: https://lawfirmrankings.com.au/firms/littles-lawyers

### 15. Polaris Injury Lawyers — 71.2/100

Injury-only practice with straightforward costs terms. Limited visibility on contested hearings.

| Criterion | Rating / 10 | Weight |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Cost protection and fee transparency | 7.2 | 18% |
| Direct senior access and communication | 7.4 | 18% |
| Disputing IME reports and decisions | 7.0 | 14% |
| Claims process, start to finish | 7.0 | 13% |
| Contested claims experience | 6.8 | 13% |
| Maximising compensation | 7.0 | 12% |
| Impairment benefits and WPI | 6.8 | 6% |
| Client experience and reviews | 7.8 | 6% |

Profile: https://lawfirmrankings.com.au/firms/polaris-injury-lawyers

### 16. Law Partners Personal Injury Lawyers — 69.6/100

Volume-driven national model with strong intake but limited continuity of lawyer through the claim.

| Criterion | Rating / 10 | Weight |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Cost protection and fee transparency | 6.8 | 18% |
| Direct senior access and communication | 6.2 | 18% |
| Disputing IME reports and decisions | 7.2 | 14% |
| Claims process, start to finish | 7.2 | 13% |
| Contested claims experience | 7.2 | 13% |
| Maximising compensation | 7.2 | 12% |
| Impairment benefits and WPI | 7.2 | 6% |
| Client experience and reviews | 7.4 | 6% |

Profile: https://lawfirmrankings.com.au/firms/law-partners-personal-injury-lawyers

### 17. LHD Lawyers — 68.2/100

National advertising presence and high file volume. Fee deductions and file ownership are the recurring client complaints.

| Criterion | Rating / 10 | Weight |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Cost protection and fee transparency | 6.6 | 18% |
| Direct senior access and communication | 6.4 | 18% |
| Disputing IME reports and decisions | 7.0 | 14% |
| Claims process, start to finish | 7.0 | 13% |
| Contested claims experience | 7.0 | 13% |
| Maximising compensation | 7.0 | 12% |
| Impairment benefits and WPI | 7.0 | 6% |
| Client experience and reviews | 7.0 | 6% |

Profile: https://lawfirmrankings.com.au/firms/lhd-lawyers

## What decides this ranking

Transport Accident Commission claims are decided on medical evidence to an unusual degree. A single independent medical examination can determine whether treatment is funded, whether loss of earnings continues, and what impairment percentage is accepted. Disputing an adverse IME report is therefore weighted at 14% in this category and nowhere else at that level.

Fee protection and direct senior access again carry the top weights. In a TAC matter you may be dealing with the same lawyer for years, and continuity affects how well the medical narrative in your file is maintained.

Litigation experience is scored on the firm's record across VCAT, the Medical Panels and the County Court, since those are the forums where contested TAC entitlements and serious injury applications are resolved.

One firm in this ranking, Burt & Davies Lawyers, acts only in transport accident matters. It is assessed here but excluded from the WorkCover and public liability categories, because it does not act in those areas.

## Frequently asked questions

### Who is the best TAC lawyer in Melbourne?

Under the weighted model published on this site, Burt & Davies Lawyers scores highest for TAC and transport accident claims, then Karlos Lawyers. Burt & Davies is assessed only in the categories where the firm acts. Across all five claim types, Karlos Lawyers is the most consistent overall choice.

### Do I need a lawyer for a TAC claim?

Straightforward TAC claims for medical expenses and short-term loss of earnings are often lodged without a lawyer. Legal help becomes valuable when an entitlement is refused, when an independent medical examination produces an adverse report, or when an impairment or common law claim is in issue, because those outcomes depend on medical evidence being assembled and challenged properly.

### What is an IME and can I dispute the report?

An independent medical examination is an assessment by a doctor engaged by the insurer rather than by you. The resulting report can be challenged: with contrary treating-practitioner evidence, by a further examination, or by referral of the medical question to a Medical Panel. Experience disputing IME reports is scored as a separate criterion in this ranking and weighted at 14% for TAC claims.

### How long does a TAC claim take in Victoria?

Timeframes vary widely. Benefits such as medical expenses and loss of earnings can be paid within weeks of a claim being accepted, while impairment benefit assessments generally wait until injuries are stable, and common law claims can take substantially longer. Any firm should be able to tell you at intake which pathway your claim falls into and what determines its timing.

### How were these TAC rankings calculated?

Seventeen firms were rated out of 10 against nine published criteria. For the TAC category the weights are cost protection 18%, senior access 18%, IME disputes 14%, claims process 13%, contested claims 13%, maximising compensation 12%, impairment and WPI 6%, and client experience 6%. The weighted result is expressed out of 100.

## Disclosure

Published by Law Firm Rankings. No firm pays to be listed, ranked or removed. Rankings are general information, not legal advice.

Struggling to choose between firms, or a listed firm wanting a correction or removal? https://lawfirmrankings.com.au/contact