New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Traumatic hernia

Legal area

Court

18 Aug 2016

Line v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2016] NZACC 227
Court

District Court

The Court upheld the reviewer and ACC decision because the totality of evidence — delayed presentation beyond guideline window, absence of contemporaneous signs of acute tissue rupture, the expert literature and Dr Sexton's opinion that direct inguinal hernias commonly reflect connective tissue weakness and predisposing factors — did not support that the hernia was caused by a significant acute traumatic tear; the appellant did not prove traumatic causation on balance of probabilities and the appeal is dismissed.
30 Nov 2015

N v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2015] NZACC 370
Court

District Court

On the balance of probabilities the appellant failed to prove the inguinal hernia resulted from a traumatic rupture in the lifting event of 19 January 2012; the evidence showed at best a temporal connection, earlier groin symptoms were recorded, there was no contemporaneous incident report or immediate clinical diagnosis, and medical opinion and guidelines make a traumatic single-event cause unlikely; therefore the appeal is dismissed and ACC's declinature is upheld.
10 Jul 2013

Hopkins v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2013] NZACC 195
Court

District Court

On the balance of probabilities the claimant's inguinal hernia was caused by a single traumatic event on 17 September 2010 (lifting a heavy gate): contemporaneous complaints of pain and swelling, prompt GP and specialist diagnosis, the treating surgeon's opinion and intra‑operative findings established causal nexus and outweighed ACC's literature‑based contrary view, therefore the injury is not excluded as a gradual process and ACC must provide cover.
28 Sept 2012

Burnie v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2012] NZACC 321
Court

District Court

The appellant failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that the umbilical hernia was caused by the alleged lifting event; the significant delay in reporting and assessment, absence of contemporaneous medical evidence of trauma, and medical opinion and literature supporting a natural genesis meant causation was not established and the appeal must be dismissed.
5 Jun 2012

Kay v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2012] NZACC 191
Court

District Court

On the balance of probabilities the strain event of 1 December 2009 caused a traumatic protrusion (inguinal hernia) by stretching/tearing the inguinal ring and thereby caused the onset of the appellant's symptomatic hernia; the presence of pre-existing tissue weakness or an asymptomatic hernia does not negate that the accident precipitated the injury, and therefore ACC cover must be granted.
13 Dec 2010

Wilson v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2010] NZACC 228
Court

District Court

Because there was no single traumatic event or series of sudden traumatic events, no immediate significant pain, and no diagnosis of traumatic hernia, it is not more probable than not that the hernia was caused by an accident under s25; repeated lifting likely caused gradual weakening, which does not meet the statutory definition of accident, so cover is not available.
11 Jul 2008

Allan v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2008] NZACC 164
Court

District Court

On the balance of probabilities the medical evidence was equivocal and did not establish that a new tearing of the abdominal wall accompanied the appearance of the hernia; the presentation could equally be explained by pressure on an existing lesion, therefore no personal injury by accident was proved and cover is not available.
24 Jul 2007

Burton v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2007] NZACC 174
Court

District Court

Because the claimant did not experience significant groin pain at the time of the alleged event, there was no early medical evidence of acute traumatic injury, and medical opinion did not support tearing of the abdominal wall, it was more probable than not the hernia was non‑traumatic; therefore cover for injury by accident was correctly declined.
23 Mar 2004

Peneha v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2004] NZACC 75
Court

District Court

Appellant failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that the inguinal hernia was substantially caused by the alleged lifting incident; significant delay in reporting, absence of an acute pain description, and failure to obtain diagnosis within the guideline period meant the claim did not satisfy the evidential criteria for a traumatic hernia and ACC cover was correctly declined.