New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Cover entitlement

Legal area

Court

25 Mar 2022

LM v ACCIDENT COMPENSATION CORPORATION [2022] NZHC 567

Citation

[2022] NZHC 567
Court

High Court

The Court held the applicant had not identified any seriously arguable question of law warranting special leave; the transitional provisions require claims lodged in 1997 to be assessed against both the 1982 and 1992 Acts and entitlements are governed by the Accident Compensation Act 2001; the 30 January 2018 letter was a confirmation not a new reviewable decision; accordingly special leave to appeal is dismissed.
5 Jun 2019

Henare v Accident Compensation Corporation (Gradual Process Injury)

Citation

[2019] NZACC 61
Court

District Court

On the evidence the appellant performed prolonged kneeling and lifting over a 25-year period (including the 5000 hours threshold referenced in studies). Interpreting 'significantly' as more than marginal or a statistically significant increased risk, and having regard to the literature showing at least a 26% increased risk (rising when kneeling is associated with lifting), the Court concluded the employment tasks caused or contributed to the knee osteoarthritis and the risk was significantly greater for persons performing those tasks; appeal allowed and cover established.
19 Dec 2017

Smith v Accident Compensation Corporation (Cover)

Citation

[2017] NZACC 149
Court

District Court

The court found that the delay between the 2007 wrist injury and the onset of shoulder problems, together with the absence of a regional/complex pain syndrome and medical imaging and specialist evidence identifying age-related tendinosis and impingement as the likely cause, meant the appellant failed to establish a causal link between the covered wrist injury and the frozen shoulder or later shoulder condition; accordingly ACC was entitled to decline cover and the appeal is dismissed.
25 Aug 2017

Martin v Accident Compensation Corporation (Cover)

Citation

[2017] NZACC 100
Court

District Court

A 'sportsman's hernia' as described is a pain condition and, absent demonstrable physical pathology or evidence of an acute injury caused by the 26 February 2013 incident, there is no injury within the meaning of the Act; contemporaneous records and expert opinion do not support that the incident caused such an injury, so ACC cover and associated surgical funding are unavailable.
27 Jan 2017

Raharuhi v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2017] NZACC 8
Court

District Court

The application for leave was dismissed because the Corporation was entitled under s390 to revise the deemed 1993 decision as it had been granted in error: the claimant's condition did not arise from an 'accident' as defined in the 1992 Act, and therefore no arguable question of law arose for the High Court.
25 Oct 2016

W v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2016] NZACC 287
Court

District Court

The appeal is dismissed: the Court has no jurisdiction to determine cover under the 1972 Act absent a contemporaneous decision and record; under the 2001 Act s26(1)(c) a direct causal nexus is required between the physical injury and the mental injury and the medical evidence establishes no such nexus here because the 1979 injuries had healed and the appellant has no recollection of them, her distress arising from knowledge of the abuse rather than ongoing effects of the physical injuries.
31 Aug 2016

Marinkovich v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2016] NZACC 246
Court

District Court

The implantation of the DPASR prosthesis alone, and mildly elevated metal ion levels with routine monitoring, do not constitute a demonstrable personal injury under the Act; absent evidence of device failure or resultant harm the statutory definition of 'treatment injury' is not met and cover is properly declined.
18 Aug 2016

Hill v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2016] NZACC 229
Court

District Court

On the balance of probabilities the District Court accepted the treating and operating surgeon's evidence that the appellant sustained an acute traumatic avulsion of the left abductor tendons in the 8 September 2014 accident; ACC failed to rebut that evidence adequately despite imaging showing some chronic change, and therefore ACC must fund the surgery and related entitlements.
19 Apr 2016

Bell v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2016] NZACC 99
Court

District Court

The judge accepted the reasoned opinions of the CAP and Dr Austin that the imaging and clinical picture were more consistent with pre‑existing/degenerative pathology common in the appellant's demographic and that the appellant failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that the need for surgery was caused by the 27 January 2013 accident; accordingly ACC's refusal to fund the surgery was upheld.
12 Apr 2016

Collins v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2016] NZACC 93
Court

District Court

The appellant failed to establish on the balance of probabilities that the supraspinatus tear was caused by the October 2006 workplace accident because contemporaneous 2008 imaging and the specialist assessment (Hadlow) showed no shoulder injury, later imaging demonstrating the tear was dated between 2008 and 2012, temporal association was inadequate to prove causation, and ACC reasonably investigated the claim; therefore cover should not be extended and the appeal is dismissed.