New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Work capacity assessment

Legal area

Court

4 Mar 2016

Dunn v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2016] NZACC 57
Court

District Court

On rehearing the Court found insufficient evidence of a material physical deterioration since the 2008 decision; Dr Ruttenberg's VIMA was factually and clinically adequate, properly accounted for fluctuating chronic pain, and legitimately concluded the appellant had capacity to undertake the seven identified job types at the time of assessment; Dr Black's contrary opinion was deficient in failing to identify or time the alleged deterioration and in under‑weighing prior rehabilitation and demonstrated day‑to‑day functional capacity. Therefore the respondent's decision was upheld and the appeal…
29 Sept 2015

Thompson v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2015] NZACC 294
Court

District Court

On a holistic appellate assessment the Court concluded Dr Kahan had overestimated the appellant's practical work capacity; the work trial did not demonstrably establish capacity, and the combined effects of ankle and shoulder pain, limited sitting/concentration, limited computer skills and depressive symptoms meant the respondent did not establish vocational independence as at March 2010; therefore the March 2010 decision was set aside and entitlements reinstated.
31 Jan 2014

Jacobsen v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2014] NZACC 23
Court

District Court

The medical assessment (VIMA) was inadequate because it failed to evaluate how chronic pain, pain medication and the claimant's depression would physiologically and cognitively affect her ability to sustain 30 or more hours per week in the seven identified work types and failed to require or explain work trials or completion of an essential multidisciplinary pain management programme; the court preferred the treating occupational physician (Dr Berry) who limited sustainable hours and recommended work trials and further rehabilitation, and accordingly the respondent's decision was quashed and…
18 Sept 2013

MacPherson v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2013] NZACC 303
Court

District Court

Dr Marshall's medical assessment adequately accounted for the appellant's pain (including fibromyalgia) and concluded she could perform 30+ hours per week in a number of identified work-types; no specific medical evidence persuasively rebutted that conclusion or assessed individual work-type requirements, therefore on the balance of probabilities the primary decision that the appellant had attained vocational independence was correct.
30 Mar 2012

Singh v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2012] NZACC 105
Court

District Court

Dr Noonan's work capacity assessment was flawed and insufficiently clear on full‑time capacity and unduly relied on a mischaracterisation of other expert opinion; the weight of evidence indicated unresolved injury-related consequences requiring staged return and further assessment, so termination of weekly compensation was not supported and the review decision quashed with reinstatement of entitlements.
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.
6 Sept 2011

Chand v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2011] NZACC 252
Court

District Court

ACC's determination of vocational independence was correct because contemporaneous, qualified occupational and medical assessments demonstrated the appellant had transferable skills and medical capacity to perform the four identified sedentary/light job types for 35+ hours/week, and subsequent evidence did not convincingly demonstrate incapacity as at the decision date.
28 Jan 2011

Young v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2011] NZACC 27
Court

District Court

Entitlements identified under the 1998 Act remain governed substantively by that Act but the procedural requirements and assessments fell to be conducted under the 2001 Act; on the evidence ACC's occupational and medical assessments overstated the claimant's match to approved job types and there was failed or incomplete rehabilitation and inadequate consultation, therefore the review decision was quashed and the work capacity assessment set aside.
28 Jan 2011

Sainsbury v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2011] NZACC 25
Court

District Court

The District Court accepted the independent medical and occupational assessments (notably Dr Bell and the VIOA) as providing sufficient objective evidence that the appellant has capacity to work 35 or more hours per week in suitable employment (tour and travel guide; stock clerk), and there was no medical evidence to sustain the appellant's claim of incapacity; the ACC decision of 26 June 2009 was therefore upheld.
1 Feb 2010

H v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2010] NZACC 14
Court

District Court

On balance of the evidence, including the work trial outcome and the specialist opinion of the treating rheumatologist that the appellant could not reasonably transition to 35+ hours per week and would benefit from a graduated return and further multidisciplinary rehabilitation, the court found the appellant lacked vocational independence in the identified job options and restored her compensation entitlements.