New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Medical and occupational assessment

Legal area

Court

24 Sept 2012

Collier v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2012] NZACC 316
Court

District Court

On review of all evidence the Court found the balance of medical and multidisciplinary reports supported the Corporation's conclusion that the appellant was capable of 30+ hours of work in a range of light occupations; the appellant had received reasonable and extensive rehabilitation and had not demonstrated the requisite engagement or objective improvement, and the contrary expert opinion was out of step with the overall evidence; accordingly the Corporation's decision was upheld and the appeal dismissed.
17 Jan 2011

Martin v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2011] NZACC 10
Court

District Court

The Court upheld ACC's 20 February 2007 decision because the occupational and medical assessments complied with statutory requirements, the appellant had completed the prescribed vocational rehabilitation, and the expert medical and occupational evidence established on the balance of probabilities that she had capacity to undertake the five identified job types for 35 hours or more per week.
18 Dec 2009

Stephens v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2009] NZACC 222
Court

District Court

The Court accepted Dr Turner's medical assessment as having properly considered the appellant's mobility limits and found both the occupational and medical assessments complied with statutory requirements under ss107 and 108; vocational independence focuses on capacity for other work-types and is not concerned with business losses or ability to secure employment, therefore the respondent's decision was correct and is confirmed.
11 Dec 2008

McArthur v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2008] NZACC 291
Court

District Court

ACC provided comprehensive rehabilitation and valid occupational and medical assessments (notably by Slow and Dr Reekie) which were not cogently rebutted; there was no material procedural failure in commencing the vocational independence process and no cogent evidence that ongoing pain precluded vocational independence in the identified occupations, therefore the appeal is dismissed and ACC's decision is upheld.
31 May 2006

Wilson v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2006] NZACC 134
Court

District Court

The Court found the appellant remained incapacitated within s103(2) because credible medical and occupational evidence established that full-time dairy farming requires regular heavy lifting and repetitive bending which the appellant cannot perform due to his covered spinal injuries; the respondent’s reliance on Dr Murray and Mr Finnis did not establish capacity to resume full pre-injury dairy farming, so the decision to cease weekly compensation was quashed and compensation restored.
18 Jan 2006

Wyatt v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2006] NZACC 9
Court

District Court

The Court found ACC's nominated job options were not realistically attainable by the appellant given his very limited education, qualifications and transferable skills and insufficient targeted rehabilitation was provided to make those options attainable; the medical assessor failed to provide adequate reasons demonstrating the appellant could sustain 35 hours per week; accordingly ACC's determination of vocational independence was unreasonable and was quashed, restoring the appellant's weekly compensation entitlements and awarding costs.
13 Jun 2005

Bondarenko v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2005] NZACC 173
Court

District Court

The court found on the facts that ACC provided the vocational rehabilitation required by the IRP, the occupational and medical assessments were not fatally flawed, and the claimant’s sustained full‑time employment in the identified role for over two years constituted strong factual evidence supporting capacity for 35 hours per week; procedural defects did not cause prejudice and did not invalidate the decision, therefore the appeal was dismissed.
20 Oct 2004

Voice v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2004] NZACC 331
Court

District Court

Because the respondent followed the statutory vocational independence procedure (completed IRP, occupational and medical assessments in accordance with Schedule 1), the assessors were appropriately qualified, and the appellant produced no cogent evidence to rebut their conclusions, the court upheld the respondent's determination that the appellant had vocational independence and dismissed the appeal.
9 Oct 2001

Gregory v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2001] NZACC 287
Court

District Court

The Court found the respondent had provided the vocational rehabilitation required by the Procedure and that two suitable job options (sales person and general clerical) remained where the occupational assessor and Dr Marshall reasonably assessed the appellant as capable of 30 or more hours per week; the security officer option was rejected as unsuitable. Because the competent assessments established capacity for work the respondent's decision dated 15 March 1999 was correct and the appeal was dismissed.
3 Nov 2000

Vick v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2000] NZACC 302
Court

District Court

The occupational and medical assessments were properly conducted and establish that the appellant has the physical capacity to perform identified work of at least 30 hours per week; availability of particular jobs is irrelevant to the statutory question of capacity, therefore cessation of weekly compensation was lawful.