4 Apr 2006
On the balance of probabilities the contemporaneous evidence, notably the GP diagnosis of bilateral forearm muscle strain and early treating records, made plausible the occurrence of a discrete physical injury in 1998; ACC did not prove that no injury occurred and therefore its revocation of cover was wrong; the original grant of cover for bilateral forearm muscle strain should stand.
21 Feb 2003
The Court preferred the evidence of Dr Dodwell, Dr Turner and Prof Gorman over Dr Wigley and found on the balance of probabilities that the appellant’s chronic pain syndrome as at August 2001 was not attributable to the 1991 injury for which cover was granted; therefore the respondent lawfully suspended entitlements under s116 and the appeal was dismissed.
17 Feb 2003
The preponderance of medical and radiological evidence (Mr Hopkins, Dr Turner, Dr Harrison and imaging reports) showed osteoarthritis and no ongoing tenosynovitis; the appellant failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that her incapacity in March 2001 was caused by the covered injury, so suspension under s116 was lawful and the appeal must be dismissed.
16 Jul 2001
The Court accepted contemporaneous medical reports and the April 2000 treating specialist report as establishing that the appellant continues to suffer effects of the original occupational overuse syndrome; the respondent failed to demonstrate that the ongoing incapacity was unrelated to the covered injury, hence the suspension was not justified and the appeal is allowed.
22 Feb 2001
Where a claimant presents a chronic regional pain syndrome without objective evidence of a discrete physical injury attributable to workplace biomechanical processes, pain alone does not satisfy the statutory requirement of a 'personal injury' under s4/s7; therefore the revocation of cover under s67A was lawful and must be upheld.
16 Oct 2000
The Court accepted the Reviewer's factual finding that the appellant initially sustained a work-related occupational overuse syndrome and, on balance of the medical evidence (three rheumatologists versus the occupational medicine specialist), concluded the ongoing pain and incapacity are principally due to OOS caused by workplace activities rather than being wholly or substantially caused by pre-existing osteoarthritis; accordingly the Reviewer's reinstatement of cover was confirmed and entitlements reinstated.
30 Apr 1999
Judge Barber determined the legal onus is on the appellant to prove on the balance of probabilities that her present chronic pain/fibromyalgia is causally linked to the 1989 OOS under s7; the existing medical evidence was equivocal and insufficient to establish more than a tenuous link; accordingly the judge did not finally allow the appeal but ordered further independent medico‑legal inquiry and viva voce evidence to resolve causation, holding that a link must be more than tenuous though OOS may be a partial cause and predisposition does not automatically exclude cover.
10 Nov 1997
On the balance of probabilities the medical evidence established that the worker suffered occupational overuse syndrome substantially caused by the nature and manner of her repeated work tasks (awkward repeated lifting) satisfying s.7(a)–(c); non‑employment activities did not materially contribute; therefore the review officer's acceptance of cover is upheld.