31 Oct 2012
Quested v Accident Compensation Corporation
- Citation
- [2012] NZACC 354
- Court
- District Court
The Corporation applied the wrong test by requiring that treatment be 'primarily' required because of the accident. Having accepted cover for extensive luxation of the two incisors, the appellant was entitled to treatment where a causal nexus existed between the injury and the treatment need. Evidence established that the accident mobilised the teeth and produced the need for treatment despite pre-existing periodontal disease; accordingly the appeal is allowed.