New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Topic

Incapacity under s37a

Legal area

Court

28 Nov 2008

MacPherson v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2008] NZACC 285
Court

District Court

Leave to appeal was granted because there were serious and arguable questions of law—specifically whether the District Court applied the correct legal test for incapacity under s37A, whether the definition of "accident" and the cumulative effect of prior covered injuries should have been considered, and whether the District Court misinterpreted or drew impermissible factual conclusions from the medical evidence—conditions sufficient to permit an appeal to the High Court.
20 Jul 2004

Stretch v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2004] NZACC 203
Court

District Court

The District Court refused leave because the core issue was factual—decided on medical evidence—that any incapacity was not attributable to the covered injury under s37A; no question of law arose and therefore leave to appeal to the High Court was not justified.
13 Oct 1999

Stretch v Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Corporation

Citation

[1999] NZACC 290
Court

District Court

On the balance of probabilities the medical and functional evidence (notably the 1998 FCE and expert medical reports of Dr Robb, Dr Cockerell and Mr Martin) demonstrated no objective, medically attributable incapacity arising from the 1987 accident; therefore the respondent was correct to cease weekly compensation.