23 Sept 2003
Medical evidence (reports of Mr Inglis and Mr Burn) established annular tears and a disc prolapse attributable to the accidents and causative of the appellant’s present disabling symptoms; therefore the respondent’s suspension of entitlements under s116 was incorrect and the decision of 22 March 2002 (and the Review decision) was quashed and entitlements reinstated.
4 Sept 2000
The Court accepted the uncontested specialist medical opinion that the TMJ rupture was initiated by over‑opening of the mouth before biting and that the subsequent biting did not constitute an external force or resistance within the meaning of s 3; therefore the injury was not an 'accident' under the Act and the appeal is dismissed.
9 Dec 1999
On the balance of probabilities the appellant's ongoing L4/5 back problems were caused by a series of accidents involving the same spinal level (including the May 1993 incident) rather than by a genetic or natural degenerative process; Hodgson's contemporaneous surgical and clinical opinion was persuasive and ACC's cessation decision was therefore set aside.