4 Aug 2003
The appeal was dismissed for want of prosecution because the appellant failed to engage or respond to registry communications after counsel withdrew, leaving no prosecution of the appeal.
5 Feb 2002
The court upheld the Review Officer: on the balance of probabilities the preponderance of medical evidence establishes the appellant's ongoing symptoms are due to avascular necrosis and the natural progression of prosthetic hips rather than the 1980 accident; therefore ACC rightly cancelled entitlements and the appellant failed to discharge the burden of proof for ongoing accident causation.
11 Sept 2001
The appeal was dismissed because the appellant failed to file submissions after multiple requests, authorising dismissal under Rule 482 of the District Court Rules.
22 Aug 2001
The appellant established on the balance of probabilities that the injuries from the earlier accidents remain causative of his present back complaints, so there was no legal basis for ACC to discontinue payments under s116; the Corporation's decision to suspend entitlements was therefore quashed and entitlements reinstated effective 25 August 2000.
16 Oct 2000
The court accepted the treating orthopaedic surgeon's opinion that the appellant's current symptoms were not related to the 1978 covered injury; under s73(1) ACC was entitled to rely on that information and to cease entitlements, and ss37A/37B require a causal link to the injury for which cover was granted, so the cessation was upheld.
21 Aug 2000
The appeal was dismissed because the judge found that the appellant unreasonably refused to participate in rehabilitation, making the respondent's suspension of weekly compensation lawful and the Review Officer's decision correct; the central question of incapacity was not resolved in the appellant's favour.
11 Jul 2000
The authorised assessor’s application of the AMA (4th Ed) produced a 19% whole-person impairment, after deducting the previously compensated 10% the residual was 9%, below the statutory 10% threshold for an Independence Allowance; because the assessment was properly made by a duly authorised medical assessor the Court must uphold it and dismiss the appeal.
28 Jun 2000
Because the respondent conceded the appeal and requested revocation, and the Court's role was limited to the correctness of the suspension decision, the Review Officer's decision of 13 October 1999 was revoked and the appellant's entitlements were reinstated from the date of cessation.
5 Apr 2000
The respondent's current incapacity is attributable to degenerative osteoarthritis caused by the 1963 malunion, not to the 1991 accident; the 1991 fall at most aggravated pre-existing disease, and aggravation alone does not provide continuing entitlement where the underlying disease is excluded by s10; therefore the Review Officer's revocation was wrong and the primary decision cancelling entitlements is reinstated.
17 Jan 2000
Medical evidence (reports of Mr Wright and Mr Caughey) established that degenerative AC joint changes were the primary cause of the appellant's left shoulder condition; employment activity at most provoked symptoms and did not satisfy the s 7(1) criteria nor amount to an accident under s 8(2); accordingly the review officer's decision denying cover was correct and the appeal is dismissed.