New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Medical evidence weight

Legal area

Court

23 Aug 2018

Fowlie v Accident Compensation Corporation (Entitlement to Surgery)

Citation

[2018] NZACC 137
Court

District Court

On the balance of probabilities the court found the lifting incident on 24 June 2015 caused a traumatic partial supraspinatus tear (with resultant impingement) for which the arthroscopic acromioplasty and cuff repair was necessary; the applicant's credible immediate onset of pain, temporal link, expert surgeon evidence (including intraoperative findings), lack of prior symptoms, and accepted basket weight outweighed CAP opinion of chronic degenerative causation.
20 Feb 2018

Standing v Accident Compensation Corporation (Entitlements)

Citation

[2018] NZACC 40
Court

District Court

Dr Thompson's opinion was conclusory and relied principally on temporality without adequate medical reasoning to link the L5/S1 pathology to the 23 August 2015 accident; the Clinical Advisory Panel's explanation that the imaging demonstrates multi-level degenerative disease not attributable to a one-off event was more compelling; therefore on the balance of probabilities the L5/S1 condition was not caused by the accident and is excluded from cover, so funding for the injection was correctly declined.
20 May 2015

LS v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2015] NZACC 112
Court

District Court

On the balance of probabilities the appellant suffered PTSD related to childhood sexual abuse and the PTSD was a material cause of the 18 October 2011 overdose; therefore the injury was not "wilfully self-inflicted" within s119(1)(a) and the s119(3)(a) exception applies, entitling the appellant to reconsideration of ACC entitlements.
30 Aug 2013

Gaeth v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2013] NZACC 275
Court

District Court

The Court preferred the treating surgeon's evidence that, on the balance of probabilities, the April 2010 accident caused the Type 2 SLAP tear and that the surgery treated a covered injury; accordingly ACC's decision declining funding was overturned.
24 Apr 2013

Kafka v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2013] NZACC 121
Court

District Court

On the balance of probabilities the evidence did not establish that the hernia resulted from a traumatic rupture caused by the lifting incident; the lack of significant pain at the time, failure to report the event or a groin lump at the contemporaneous GP consultation, and the BMA opinion that the history was consistent with disease led the Court to accept the non‑traumatic origin and dismiss the appeal.
1 Feb 2010

H v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2010] NZACC 14
Court

District Court

On balance of the evidence, including the work trial outcome and the specialist opinion of the treating rheumatologist that the appellant could not reasonably transition to 35+ hours per week and would benefit from a graduated return and further multidisciplinary rehabilitation, the court found the appellant lacked vocational independence in the identified job options and restored her compensation entitlements.
14 May 2009

PHILIP NEIL MACPHERSON V ACCIDENT COMPENSATION CORPORATION HC WN CIV 2008-485-2690

Citation

openlaw-8d144e4f_32a3_486b_9951_cb6ae4849401.pdf
Court

High Court

The District Court erred as a matter of law by failing to address and give reasons for accepting or rejecting material post-1997 medical evidence that was directly relevant to whether the Corporation could have been "not satisfied" as to continuing entitlements; the matter must be reheard by the District Court considering that evidence.
2 Mar 2007

Bartlett v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2007] NZACC 42
Court

District Court

Dr Noonan's contemporaneous assessment of 8 September 2005 established that the appellant had recovered sufficient capacity for work; the ARC18 dated 3 November 2005 was retrospective with no supporting evidence for backdating and thus insufficient to overturn the prior assessment, so ACC lawfully declined to reinstate weekly compensation from 20 September 2005 and the appeal is dismissed.
13 Jun 2005

Brotherton v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2005] NZACC 172
Court

District Court

On the facts the appellant returned to and performed substantially the same pre-injury employment full time for a substantial period (about 17 months); orthopaedic and occupational medicine specialists reported no persisting structural pathology and opined she could work with restrictions; the termination was by organisational redundancy, a non-injury break in causation, therefore appellant failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that her incapacity at the relevant time was caused by the 2000 accident and the ACC decision to decline weekly compensation was correctly confirmed.
28 Apr 2005

Sweeney v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2005] NZACC 137
Court

District Court

The appeal is dismissed because the preponderance of medical evidence and contemporaneous records show rubeotic glaucoma was developing before the 1993 accident and the known medical timeframe for rubeotic glaucoma makes it implausible that the accident caused the condition; the claimant therefore failed to establish causation on the balance of probabilities.