17 Sept 2013
The appellant failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that the condition requiring surgery was caused by the covered accident; medical evidence and the lengthy delay showed the surgery treated degenerative osteoarthritis rendered symptomatic, so the respondent correctly declined funding and the appeal is dismissed.
12 Nov 2009
The District Court found that Dr Kim failed to ensure an adequate, explicit management plan and safety‑netting (specifically failed to ensure the mother understood to watch for a rash and take immediate action), that this constituted medical error, and that on the balance of probabilities the resulting delay materially worsened Phoenix's injuries; accordingly the Review Decision was quashed and ACC cover under s32 was ordered.
22 Dec 2005
On the balance of probabilities the respondent’s hernia was caused by the 23 November 2004 workplace event: the respondent’s credible and consistent account, timely report of the incident, persistent symptoms until diagnosis, and the unchallenged opinion of the treating surgeon that it was very likely caused by the incident together outweigh the significance of the diagnostic delay; Peneha guidelines are useful but not determinative.
27 Jul 1998
The appellant did not establish that any personal injury he suffered was caused by medical error or mishap by the GP; medical evidence showed the loss of the testicle was not preventable by intervention when he first presented and the pain derived from the underlying condition rather than from treatment, therefore no compensable personal injury under the Act and the appeal is dismissed.
10 Dec 1997
Court found on the balance of probabilities that the appellant suffered a neck strain during the lithotomy positioning on 12 June 1995 but that the injury did not constitute medical error or medical mishap under s5; however the circumstances amount to personal injury by accident under s8(2)(a); matter is remitted to the Review Officer to consider cover under s8(2)(a) relying on the Court's factual findings.
4 Aug 1997
On the medical and occupational therapy evidence, supported by the appellant's delay in seeking treatment and absence of additional contrary evidence, the appellant's continuing back problems were not shown to be attributable to the 1995 lawnmower accident; therefore the Review Officer and respondent correctly declined further entitlements and the appeal must be dismissed in part, with a limited award of costs.