9 Dec 2008
BARRON V ACCIDENT COMPENSATION CORPORATION HC AK CIV 2008-485-325
- Citation
- openlaw-0535dcde_0859_4f29_a3ea_270229a37d47.pdf
- Court
- High Court
The appellant was not 'receiving treatment from, or at the direction of, one or more registered health professionals' when the injury occurred (no evidential foundation of ongoing treatment after prescription in 2002), therefore the infection was not 'caused by treatment' under s 32; additionally s 33(1)(g) does not apply because the contact lens did not 'fail' in the sense of malfunction or defect, so the appeal is dismissed.