8 Dec 2015
The appeal was dismissed because the objective specialist dental opinion established that the bridge failure resulted from non-accident related chronic dental decay and periodontal disease, contemporaneous medical records did not record dental injury, and the appellant failed to discharge the onus of proving a causal link to the 2011 accidents.
28 May 2010
Regulation 8(2) permits reimbursement only for travel to the nearest place where the claimant can obtain the relevant treatment or certification; the appellant travelled to a non-nearest GP when nearer providers existed in Papamoa/Tauranga, therefore ACC correctly declined the transport claim and the appeal is dismissed.
16 Feb 2007
Dismissal because the appellant failed to produce any medical or contemporaneous evidence establishing a personal injury or that any medical treatment caused the alleged injury; independent specialist opinion and hospital records negate the claim and the burden was not discharged.
2 Apr 2004
The appeal is dismissed because the claim was lodged more than twelve months after the alleged injury and, objectively, the delay prejudiced the respondent's ability to determine entitlement (absence of contemporaneous medical evidence, lack of ongoing treatment records and an equivocal specialist opinion), and the appellant failed to prove the 1994 incident substantially contributed to his present symptoms.
26 May 1995
The appeal was dismissed because the claimant failed to establish a causal nexus between the 1986 accident and the dental condition; significant delay and absence of contemporaneous records, together with expert opinion questioning causation, meant the Corporation was justified in declining the dental claim under the Act (s63(2A) considerations and requirements under s7).