25 May 2012
Tate v Accident Compensation Corporation
- Citation
- [2012] NZACC 182
- Court
- District Court
On fresh evaluation of the evidence the Court found the reviewer and Corporation erred in concluding vocational independence; the court accepted the appellant's treating expert (Dr Wigley) as credible and persuasive regarding winging of the scapula and chronic pain syndrome which, together with inadequate rehabilitation and inability to sustain the postulated hours, meant the appellant was not vocationally independent, therefore the decision ceasing weekly compensation was quashed and weekly compensation and entitlements must be restored.