New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Attribution of claim costs

Legal area

Court

2 Feb 2001

Invercargill Licensing Trust v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2001] NZACC 17
Court

District Court

On the medical factual findings adopted (notably the opinions of Dr Fountain and Dr Anderson) the claimant's disabling condition was substantively caused by a pre-existing degenerative cervical condition and complications from surgery rather than by an acute workplace strain; therefore the payments in 1993/1994 were not qualifying payments attributable to the appellant and the respondent's decision to include those costs was plainly wrong and is quashed.
20 Dec 2000

Good Health Wanganui Ltd v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2000] NZACC 345
Court

District Court

Experts agreed the 1 June 1996 head injury while in the appellant's employ precipitated the claimant's ongoing incapacity even if pre-existing minor injuries made him more susceptible; the statutory definition of "qualifying claim" was satisfied; regulation 5C(4)(b) and related provisions do not import a discretion to exclude the payments for the 1998/1999 assessment; consequently the payments are qualifying payments attributable to the appellant for experience rating and the respondent's attribution was lawful.
11 Jul 2000

Horizon Printing and Packaging Ltd v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2000] NZACC 165
Court

District Court

Based on contemporaneous medical evidence demonstrating RSD causally linked to the accepted work injury and ongoing medical certificates during the 1996/97 premium year, ACC properly exercised its discretion under s104 and the Experience Rating Regulations to include Sutherland's costs in the appellant's 1996/97 experience rating; there was no factual or legal basis to disturb that decision.
16 Nov 1999

University of Otago v Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Corporation

Citation

[1999] NZACC 332
Court

District Court

Because the appellant accepted that the claimant suffered a work-related injury and the payments fall within the statutory definition of qualifying payments under the Experience Rating Regulations 1993, the ongoing claim costs were properly attributable to the appellant's work history; accordingly the appeal is dismissed.
15 Jul 1999

Whitianga Excavators Limited v Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Corporation

Citation

[1999] NZACC 192
Court

District Court

The respondent acted properly and responsibly in relying on medical opinion and GP certification; it did not breach statutory duties or cause manifest unfairness by attributing the claimant's full costs to the appellant's Experience Rating for the year ended 31 March 1998, and the limited grounds available to employers to challenge such attribution were not established here, so the ERA stands.
11 Feb 1999

Nelson Marlborough Health Services (McKenzie) v Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Corporation

Citation

[1999] NZACC 25
Court

District Court

Because the appellant had previously accepted that the 1991 injury was a work injury (pre-1992 Act) there was no s.65(6) decision to review and the time for challenging that acceptance had expired; the January 9 1997 letter was an administrative mistake that did not confer jurisdiction on the review officer, so the review officer lacked jurisdiction to decide classification or attribution and the appeal is dismissed.

New Zealand Case Law

Invercargill Licensing Trust v Accident Compensation Corporation

Good Health Wanganui Ltd v Accident Compensation Corporation

Horizon Printing and Packaging Ltd v Accident Compensation Corporation

University of Otago v Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Corporation

Whitianga Excavators Limited v Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Corporation

Nelson Marlborough Health Services (McKenzie) v Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Corporation