New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Consequential injury

Legal area

Court

27 Mar 2019

DAVIDOFF v ACCIDENT COMPENSATION CORPORATION [2019] NZHC 604

Citation

[2019] NZHC 604
Court

High Court

The application for special leave was dismissed because Judge Walker's factual findings—that there was no identifiable knee injury and no causal link between the accepted 2008 back injury and the applicant's knee symptoms—were supported by overwhelming medical evidence and did not constitute errors of law; the District Court correctly refused leave and the applicant had no reasonable prospects of success on appeal.
21 Oct 2016

HH v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2016] NZACC 286
Court

District Court

On the balance of probabilities the appellant failed to establish that she has PCOS under the internationally accepted Rotterdam diagnostic criteria and failed to establish a causal link between PCOS and antipsychotic medication; the court preferred the specialist opinion of Dr Kee over the other material and accordingly upheld ACC's decision declining cover for PCOS and dismissed the appeal.
19 Oct 2016

Pahi v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2016] NZACC 284
Court

District Court

Weighing the divergent expert opinions under the Ambros approach, the Court found there was sufficient material on the balance of probabilities — including a strong temporal link and specialists' acknowledgement of a possible connection — to infer that the 31 May 2012 workplace event caused the loose body to become dislodged/symptomatic; accordingly the Aon decision and the review were quashed and the appellant was entitled to ACC cover for the 2012 accident.
11 Aug 2016

Davidoff v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2016] NZACC 213
Court

District Court

The appellant failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that his knee condition is either a discrete personal injury caused by accident or consequential on his accepted 2008 spinal injury; the medical evidence did not identify structural knee injury or a causal link, so ACC's decision to decline cover was upheld.
28 Oct 2015

Thomas v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2015] NZACC 321
Court

District Court

The appeal is dismissed because the earlier decision declining cover was made within the statutory timeframes so s58 deemed cover is not available, there was insufficient contemporaneous evidence to conclude the angiogram caused the infarct, and although the Corporation initially lacked valid consent to investigate further, it now holds consent and should proceed to obtain records and make a fresh decision.
11 Nov 2014

Otto v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2014] NZACC 306
Court

District Court

Judge preferred the specialist opinion that the failure to include the C5/6 segment in the initial C6/7 fusion predictably caused the subsequent C5/6 injury; on the balance of probabilities the second injury was a consequence of the first surgery and was not caused wholly or substantially by degenerative disease or ageing, therefore s20(2)(d) is satisfied and ACC must grant cover.
7 Oct 2014

Bines v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2014] NZACC 251
Court

District Court

On the balance of probabilities the claimant's current condition by July 2013 was wholly or substantially caused by a pre‑existing impingement syndrome rendered symptomatic after the fall; the temporary post‑accident bursitis resolved and any rotator cuff weakening resulting from reduced use was too remote or not a significant contributor to found ACC liability, so the Corporation's declinature is upheld.
30 Sept 2014

Domazet v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2014] NZACC 246
Court

District Court

Contemporaneous medical records showed no left-sided symptoms while the appellant was working, the specialist evidence preferring Dr Adams established lack of a temporal link and an idiopathic cause, and there was no evidential basis to treat the left conditions as consequential on the accepted right-sided injury; therefore the left DQT and left CTS were not work-related gradual process injuries and the appeals fail.
23 Sept 2014

O'Donnell v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2014] NZACC 230
Court

District Court

The Court was not satisfied on the balance of probabilities that the first metatarsal osteoarthritis or the sesamoid cyst were caused by the accidents or by the treatment (casting/moon boot); accordingly the appellant failed to establish causation under the Act and the Corporation's and review decisions were upheld.
12 Sept 2014

Aalderink v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2014] NZACC 210
Court

District Court

Leave to appeal was refused because the disputed matters were essentially medical and factual, the assessor was duly authorised and peer-reviewed, there was no contrary responsible medical opinion showing a manifest flaw, and therefore no arguable question of law to justify High Court leave.