New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Medical assessment of work capacity

Legal area

Court

24 Mar 2016

Kennedy v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2016] NZACC 75
Court

District Court

The Court found the Corporation lacked a reasonable evidentiary basis to conclude the appellant was likely to achieve vocational independence because recommended pain management steps (referral to a pain specialist and trial of amitriptyline) were not followed up, the appellant was only sustaining limited hours with rest breaks, and the VIMA failed to engage adequately with whether existing pharmacological management could support increased hours; accordingly the Corporation's decision was set aside.
23 Aug 2013

Kennedy v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2013] NZACC 266
Court

District Court

The evidence did not show a material flaw in the vocational independence process: IRPs demonstrated that comprehensive rehabilitation (as required by s107(3)) was completed, medical and occupational assessors (s108) credibly found capacity for medium to sedentary roles with no conflicting medical opinion, and therefore the Corporation's decision finding vocational independence was upheld and the appeal dismissed.
15 Aug 2013

Young v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2013] NZACC 253
Court

District Court

The judge found Dr Kanji's objective clinical observations and comprehensive consideration of the appellant's activities and prior reports more reliable than Dr Wigley's reliance on self-reporting; inconsistencies in the appellant's statements and demonstrated physical activity supported the review decision that he had vocational independence, so the appeal was dismissed.
23 Nov 2012

Koppan v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2012] NZACC 383
Court

District Court

The Court held that the vocational and medical assessments, taken together and conducted by qualified assessors considering the FCE, medical reports and occupational reports, were reasonable and not so deficient as to invalidate the vocational independence decision; absence of a work trial and criticisms of the FCE created caution but did not materially undermine the assessments, so the appeal was dismissed.
23 Jul 2012

Wainohu v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2012] NZACC 244
Court

District Court

Because the medical and occupational assessments (notably Dr Ruttenberg's report) adequately addressed the appellant's pain and functional capacity, there was no contrary medical evidence or demonstrated procedural flaw, and the appellant's rehabilitation had been completed, the Court accepted the assessments and held the appellant had attained vocational independence, dismissing the appeal.
11 Apr 2011

Baker v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2011] NZACC 109
Court

District Court

The Court dismissed the appeal because there was no evidential basis that the vocational independence medical assessor failed to consider relevant covered injuries or made a significant error; the available records contained no contemporaneous evidence of a symptomatic wrist injury at the time of assessment and the appellant's review evidence was vague, while Dr Kahan's functional analysis was reasonable and uncontradicted by contemporaneous medical opinion.
8 Apr 2011

McKay v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2011] NZACC 114
Court

District Court

Dr Turner expressly considered the appellant's cervical and lumbar conditions and chronic fatigue, medical rehabilitation objectives had been met, and his assessment that the appellant was fit for light/sedentary work (including the three specified work-types) complied with the statutory assessment procedure; therefore the respondent's determination of vocational independence stands.
14 Oct 2010

Mackway-Jones v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2010] NZACC 182
Court

District Court

The District Court found that Dr Murray's contemporaneous 2007 medical assessment, supported by earlier specialist opinions, adequately accounted for the appellant's left arm limitations and established capacity to sustain the three identified work types 35+ hours per week; the later 2009 opinion (Dr Glass) did not displace those reasoned assessments, therefore vocational independence was correctly determined.
22 Jun 2010

Compton v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2010] NZACC 88
Court

District Court

The appeal fails because (1) statutory rehabilitation completion is limited to identified vocational rehabilitation in the Individual Rehabilitation Plan and no outstanding vocational rehabilitation required completion before the VI process; (2) the Medical Assessor, Dr Waite, had adequate information, properly considered the appellant's chronic neurogenic pain and its functional limits for each work‑type, and (3) his ergonomic qualifications were generic, not job‑specific; therefore the decision that the appellant had attained vocational independence was correct and is upheld.
5 Feb 2010

Bretherton v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2010] NZACC 15
Court

District Court

The District Court found Dr Antoniadis's medical assessment was comprehensive and adequately considered the appellant's pain and functional limitations; the assessment validly matched those limitations to the physical demands of seven sedentary/light work-types, and psychological treatment was not a prerequisite to finding vocational independence; therefore the decision determining vocational independence and ceasing weekly compensation was upheld.