New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Rehabilitation funding

Legal area

Court

16 Jul 2019

CO v Accident Compensation Corporation (Vocational Independence)

Citation

[2019] NZACC 79
Court

District Court

The Court found on the balance of probabilities that ACC followed appropriate, timely and adequate rehabilitation steps and conducted proper vocational independence occupational and medical assessments (notably Catherine White and Dr Kahan), that rehabilitation was complete and no further ACC-funded rehabilitation was due, and therefore the Corporation's decision of 16 March 2017 that the appellant had achieved vocational independence must stand.
8 Nov 2018

Nicholl v Accident Compensation Corporation (Social Rehabilitation)

Citation

[2018] NZACC 178
Court

District Court

The appeal was dismissed as there was no longer a live issue: the respondent supplied a new GPS emergency locator beacon and agreed to arrange a trial of a satellite telephone on request, removing the need for the Court to determine the original funding refusal.
23 Mar 2016

CHALECKI v ACCIDENT COMPENSATION CORPORATION [2016] NZHC 517

Citation

[2016] NZHC 517
Court

High Court

Special leave was declined because none of the issues met the Murray threshold: the questions either were factual, would not affect the outcome, or lacked sufficient public importance or arguability. The Authority was correct to confine review to the 14 April 1993 decision rejecting the self-employment grant, to conclude that no specific claims for farm expenses or business losses had been made at that time, to find s80 inapplicable to the claimed losses, and to accept as a factual matter the existence of a circa $5,000 guideline for ordinary self-employment grants; no extraordinary factor ju…
6 Dec 2013

O'Malley-Scott v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2013] NZACC 408
Court

District Court

Leave to appeal was denied because the District Court found no significant question of law: suitably qualified assessments established vocational independence in four sustainable work-types satisfying s108, and the refusal to fund further early childhood education did not amount to an error of law given other available work-types.
24 Dec 2012

O'Malley-Scott v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2012] NZACC 414
Court

District Court

The reviewer exceeded her remit by addressing the broader question of whether vocational rehabilitation was complete for all work types rather than the discrete funding decision; vocational independence was correctly determined because the claimant was suited to at least one category of work for 30+ hours per week (four sales/reception work types were medically and vocationally sustainable) and there is no statutory obligation to fund upskilling into a claimant's preferred vocation where other suitable work is available.
20 Jan 2012

Nicholl-Stevens v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2012] NZACC 14
Court

District Court

Judge declined to determine vocational independence because credible evidence indicated the appellant might achieve full-time capacity with a modest, defined course of physiotherapy; the court required the parties to confer and report on a three-month physiotherapy plan and costs before making a final determination.
29 Jun 2011

Morgan v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2011] NZACC 176
Court

District Court

The appellant failed to present a specific, viable, costed and time‑bound training proposal in a specialised field; ACC reasonably relied on up‑to‑date occupational and medical assessments identifying suitable work types based on existing skills and lawfully concluded that comprehensive and cost‑effective vocational rehabilitation was complete, and that the appellant was vocationally independent in specified roles.
28 Feb 2011

Whiting v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2011] NZACC 54
Court

District Court

Because the appellant succeeded to a limited degree on the lifelink alarm issue and the claimed disbursements were found to be reasonable and necessary, ACC was ordered to pay specified disbursements totaling $1,312.40 (travel $389.40; typing $266.25; medical specialist's report $618.75; secure post $38.00).
23 Oct 2009

Parata v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2009] NZACC 183
Court

District Court

Section 112 terminates entitlement to weekly compensation upon a vocational independence determination (after the three month notification period); because eligibility for vocational rehabilitation under section 85 requires entitlement to weekly compensation, a person determined vocationally independent cannot meet section 85 and ACC was not required to consider the application on the merits; appeal dismissed.
7 Mar 2005

Stampa v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2005] NZACC 72
Court

District Court

The court found that the appellant's right below‑knee amputation materially altered her transport status and that travelling as a passenger is causally related to the covered injury; such need can fall within Schedule 1 s.21(1)(c)(iv) entitling the appellant to transport for independence support as a passenger. The primary and review decisions declining assistance were set aside and the matter was remitted to ACC for a further assessment and fresh primary decision on travelling as a passenger. The court also held as a matter of policy that funding a vehicle cannot be approved while the appell…