New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Acc user handbook

Legal area

Court

10 Jan 2011

Duff v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2011] NZACC 1
Court

District Court

The assessor's impairment rating of 32% was upheld because it was made in accordance with the prescribed AMA Guides and ACC User Handbook, which provide that pain is not generally separately rateable except where specifically noted; the appellant failed to produce cogent evidence showing an error in application of the Guides and the Court gave greater weight to the assessor trained and experienced in applying the Guides.
3 Sept 2010

Walker v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2010] NZACC 152
Court

District Court

For a lump sum assessment of a treatment injury that is a less-than-expected outcome of necessary surgery, the correct methodology is to assess current impairment, identify the impairment attributable to the ordinary consequence of the surgery (expected 'good result') as pre-existing/non-covered per the ACC User Handbook and AMA Guides, deduct that from current impairment, and convert the net lower extremity impairment to whole person impairment; applying that method (50% LEI minus 37% LEI = 13% LEI = 5% WPI) the 5% WPI assessment was correct and the appeal must be dismissed.
6 Sept 2004

Kengike v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2004] NZACC 269
Court

District Court

The appellant's credible sworn denial combined with material inconsistencies in the respondent's historical transaction summary meant the Court would not rely on the record to displace entitlement to an independence allowance for the 1975 amputation (60% WPI); conversely, the Court upheld Dr Powell's impairment assessment for the 2001 injuries because it complied with the AMA Guides and the ACC User Handbook and was peer-reviewed, and Dr Newburn's divergent opinion did not demonstrate a flaw in that assessment.

New Zealand Case Law

Duff v Accident Compensation Corporation

Walker v Accident Compensation Corporation

Kengike v Accident Compensation Corporation