10 Jun 2013
The reviewer correctly declined jurisdiction because as at 16 November 2011 there was no active, reviewable decision by ACC; the 15 June 2010 letter was advisory and ACC lawfully ceased payments on 10 July 2010 based on the GP's certification, and any substantive decision made subsequently (8 April 2013) is subject to review.
22 Aug 2012
The appeal is dismissed because the respondent revoked the impugned decision and reinstated entitlements with no detriment, leaving no live issue for review or appeal; alternatively, the initial cessation was lawful because the appellant's refusal to nominate and undergo assessment was unreasonable under section 72 and section 117(3) of the Act.
26 Aug 2008
The medical assessor and the reviewer failed to give adequate, coherent reasons addressing the treating specialists' opinions that the appellant required a graduated return to work and could not sustain 35 hours per week; because the Corporation did not discharge its evidential burden to prove vocational independence, the determination of vocational independence was quashed and the appellant's entitlements were to be reinstated.
25 Jul 2008
The Court preferred the weight of Dr Ruttenberg's opinion that, while the loose bodies were pre-existing degenerative fragments, the workplace accident produced sufficient force to move or reposition them causing impingement and a discrete new injury; therefore the condition was accident-related and not excluded by s117, so the cancellation of entitlements was unlawful.
7 Jan 2008
The judge accepted the treating GP's evidence of profound shock and some depression, and found the appellant was significantly disadvantaged by lack of medical information (delay in provision of her file), unclear presentation of ACC's fact sheet and the traumatic effect of the amputation; these factors together constituted extenuating circumstances under s135 and warranted acceptance of the late review application.
14 Dec 2004
Judge Beattie correctly applied the legal test requiring the appellant to prove a causal nexus on the balance of probabilities; the medical evidence (Hopkins and Otto) established the original back strain had largely dissipated and the degenerative spondylosis was the ongoing cause of symptoms, therefore entitlements were properly ceased and reassessment for an independence allowance correctly refused.
29 Jul 2004
On the balance of probabilities the medical evidence overall established there was no causal nexus as at 27 February 2001 between the 1988 back strain and the appellant’s ongoing symptoms; specialists’ investigations found no objective pathology linking the current condition to the 1988 injury, so suspension of entitlements under s116 was lawful and the appeal must be dismissed.
10 Oct 2001
On the balance of probabilities the appellant failed to establish that his present incapacity is causally connected to the 1985 personal injury; the medical evidence of Professors Pollock and Gorman was found most persuasive and supported ACC's decision under s.73(1) to cease entitlements.
9 Oct 2001
Medical evidence established that the appellant's present incapacity is caused by osteoarthritis (a disease) rather than the original knee injury; disease is excluded by s.10 and therefore entitlements could be lawfully ceased under s.73(1); Workers' Compensation acceleration principles do not apply to displace the statutory scheme.
27 Aug 2001
Causation was not established on the evidence: multiple specialist opinions found no neurological or other medical basis linking the appellant's current wrist/arm weakness to the earlier accepted carpal tunnel/tendonitis injury; temporal continuity alone did not suffice to prove causal connection, therefore ACC's decision to cease entitlements under s73(1) was correct and must be upheld.