31 Oct 2018
Weighing the medical evidence, the Court concluded the TFC pathology is chronic and degenerative and pre-dates the 2016 accident; the accident rendered that pre-existing pathology symptomatic but did not cause the pathology requiring surgery, so the need for surgery is not covered and ACC's decline is upheld.
16 Jun 2015
On the balance of probabilities the treating surgeon's evidence that the 16 December 2012 incident caused the left medial meniscal tear is accepted: the left knee was essentially asymptomatic before the event, imaging and operative findings did not show frank arthritis sufficient to have caused the tear, and degeneration was assessed to have contributed less than 20%; accordingly ACC's decision denying cover is quashed and ACC must contribute to the cost of surgery.
29 Nov 2013
On the evidence, including contemporaneous physiotherapy notes, a credible witness affidavit and persuasive specialist opinion (Swan supported by Chin), the Court was satisfied on the balance of probabilities that a workplace accident occurred and that it caused a traumatic extension of a pre-existing rotator cuff tear and associated biceps tendon dislocation for which surgery was necessary; therefore s26(2) and (4) exclusions do not apply and the review decision denying funding was quashed.
21 Oct 2011
The District Court properly evaluated the medical evidence and reasonably concluded the appellant's later deterioration was due to degenerative lumbar disease not causally related to the covered accidents; no question of law arose meriting High Court scrutiny, therefore leave to appeal was refused.
29 Sept 2010
Specialist medical evidence established there was no rotator cuff pathology and that the appellant's shoulder pain was attributable to advanced cervical spondylosis (degenerative) which was not shown to be caused by his employment; therefore there was no compensable personal injury under s30 and the ACC declination was correct.
24 Jul 2007
On the available material the appellant failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that the 10% impairment was substantially and effectively caused by the covered 1995 injury rather than by pre-existing degenerative disease and prior surgery; therefore entitlement to an independence allowance was correctly declined.