New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Definition of "accident"

Legal area

Court

27 Jul 2010

DESHAN SAM V ACCIDENT COMPENSATION CORPORATION CA715/2009

Citation

openlaw-bf81b18f_32e1_4e98_8402_f89d49f04b74.pdf
Court

Court of Appeal

Mallon J was correct that none of the possible causes of the claimant's cerebral palsy fell within the statutory definition of "accident": a force "external to the human body" is properly read as external to the mother, not merely external to the foetus, and "environment" in the statutory context does not reasonably include conditions within the womb; accordingly special leave to appeal is declined.
18 Nov 2003

Posa v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2003] NZACC 286
Court

District Court

The appellant failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that the hernia was caused by an external single event (lifting/dragging his father); conflicting dates, medical reports indicating a coughing onset, and adverse credibility findings render it more probable the hernia developed gradually or from internal forces, so it does not satisfy the statutory definition of "accident" under s28(2) and the appeal is dismissed.
30 Oct 2000

Biggart v HIH Workable Limited

Citation

[2000] NZACC 290
Court

District Court

On the facts the appellant's injury resulted from internal muscular contraction to stabilise her body against gravity and ground reaction without any external applied force, fulcrum or sudden external leverage; therefore the event did not "involve the application of a force or resistance external to the human body" as required by s28(2)(a)(i) and no accident occurred under the Act, so the appeal fails.
6 Oct 2000

Lovelace v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2000] NZACC 264
Court

District Court

The Court found on the balance of probabilities that the disc prolapse resulted from a violent sneeze which generated internal force; s3 requires an external force or resistance for an event to qualify as an "accident"; therefore the injury was not caused by an "accident" under the Act and ACC's revocation of cover was upheld.
27 Nov 1998

Tavita v Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Corporation

Citation

[1998] NZACC 245
Court

District Court

The appellant's cervical injury, though a physical injury, was not caused by a specific event involving application of an external force or resistance and appears to be internal/gradual in origin arising from sleeping posture; therefore it does not satisfy the statutory definition of "accident" and is not covered under the Act.

New Zealand Case Law

DESHAN SAM V ACCIDENT COMPENSATION CORPORATION CA715/2009

Posa v Accident Compensation Corporation

Biggart v HIH Workable Limited

Lovelace v Accident Compensation Corporation

Tavita v Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Corporation