New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Entitlement reinstatement

Legal area

Court

27 Jan 2017

Dobbs v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2017] NZACC 9
Court

District Court

The Court held that at the date of the decision the Corporation did not have a sufficient evidential basis to be not satisfied that the appellant's symptoms were no longer the result of the covered L4/5 disc prolapse; medical evidence supported ongoing effects of the injury materially contributing to incapacity, therefore the suspension was unjustified and entitlements (including weekly compensation) must be reinstated.
19 May 2016

Va'aelua-Sio v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2016] NZACC 137
Court

District Court

The VIOA was flawed in relation to the Lawn Mowing Contractor/Grounds Person option because the salary average constituted a significant departure from the appellant's pre‑injury earnings making it vocationally unsuitable; the VIMA was unsound because the medical assessor failed to coherently and consistently analyse key functional requirements (repetitive/prolonged tool use, cold‑environment aggravation, and risk of re‑injury) across recommended work types, so it did not provide a reliable basis to find capacity for 30+ hours per week. Consequently the Corporation's decision of 6 August 2014…
29 Sept 2015

Thompson v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2015] NZACC 294
Court

District Court

On a holistic appellate assessment the Court concluded Dr Kahan had overestimated the appellant's practical work capacity; the work trial did not demonstrably establish capacity, and the combined effects of ankle and shoulder pain, limited sitting/concentration, limited computer skills and depressive symptoms meant the respondent did not establish vocational independence as at March 2010; therefore the March 2010 decision was set aside and entitlements reinstated.
27 Jan 2015

Green v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2015] NZACC 15
Court

District Court

On the evidence before the Corporation there was not a reasonable basis to conclude Mr Green was likely to achieve vocational independence under s110(3): the FCE, IMAs, work trial and rehabilitation records showed ongoing disabling and unpredictable pain (including unaddressed adjacent segment syndrome), inability to sustain 30 hours per week (max ~15 hours shown in the work trial), and deficiencies in the VIMA and VIOA assessments; accordingly the decision finding vocational independence was unlawful and was set aside and entitlements reinstated.
31 Jul 2014

Ruru v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2014] NZACC 174
Court

District Court

The court preferred and reconciled the expert evidence to conclude that the appellant's post-1974/pre-1995 injuries and treatments, including the circa-1982 meniscectomy, materially and substantially contributed to the development of his post-injury osteoarthritis, bringing the causal event within ACC coverage; accordingly the ACC decisions refusing reinstatement were set aside and entitlements resumed.
12 Mar 2012

Stephens v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2012] NZACC 80
Court

District Court

The Court quashed ACC's 28 October 2010 decision because, on the medical evidence considered as at October 2010, the appellant could not be shown to sustain 30 or more hours per week in the generic work‑types without employer‑specific flexibility; therefore the appellant had not attained vocational independence and his entitlements must be reinstated.
23 Apr 2009

Mitchell v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2009] NZACC 66
Court

District Court

The 13 June 2007 letter was an administrative explanation reiterating the preexisting District Court determination and did not constitute a new decision under s6; the 22 February 2007 approvals were limited to facilitating left knee rehabilitation and did not reinstate right knee entitlements; consequently the reviewers and this Court had no basis to overturn prior determinations and the appeals fail.

New Zealand Case Law

Dobbs v Accident Compensation Corporation

Va'aelua-Sio v Accident Compensation Corporation

Thompson v Accident Compensation Corporation

Green v Accident Compensation Corporation

Ruru v Accident Compensation Corporation

Stephens v Accident Compensation Corporation

Mitchell v Accident Compensation Corporation