28 Aug 2015
The application for leave was dismissed because the appellant failed to identify any question of law or alternative interpretation of the Regulations; the applicable regulations (reg 8) admit no discretion to vary the prescribed contribution, so no arguable legal error arose.
20 Feb 2014
Appeals dismissed because claimant failed to supply required medical evidence and a valid consent to enable ACC to determine whether the 2012 surgery and related transport/home help were for a covered injury, and there was no prior approval for treatment or taxi transport; statutory scheme (Act and Regulations) requires prior agreement and evidential causal nexus, which were absent, so ACC had no liability and did not unreasonably delay.
8 Jul 2010
The appellant failed to prove that Dr Darr provided acupuncture that could not be replicated by duly qualified practitioners in Palmerston North; therefore travel to Feilding was not to the nearest place providing the required treatment under Regulation 8(2)(a) and ACC's decision to decline transport costs was upheld; however the Reviewer was wrong to refuse review hearing costs as it was reasonable for the appellant to pursue a legal determination of entitlement.
18 Jun 2007
Regulation 8(2)(a) limits payment to travel to the nearest provider able to give the required rehabilitation; there was no evidence Dr Carl uniquely provided services unavailable in Rotorua, so extra mileage via Napier was not payable and the respondent's decision to limit reimbursement to direct Rotorua–Wellington travel was correct.
18 Jun 2007
Regulation 13 does not apply to the claimed travel; Regulation 17 cannot create a new entitlement where none exists; Regulation 12 authorises contribution for one escort when the claimant's medical condition requires an escort, and on the facts an escort from Wairakei to Napier was reasonable and payable to the appellant's mother, subject to Regulation 12(3)(a) preventing duplicate payment if the claimant was already reimbursed for the same journey.