New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Incisional hernia

Legal area

Court

25 May 2016

Carpenter v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2016] NZACC 149
Court

District Court

The Court accepted and preferred the expert evidence of ACC's senior medical advisor that, given the emergency conversion to open surgery, intra-operative inflammation, prolonged procedure and the applicant's BMI, the incisional hernia was an ordinary consequence of the treatment and therefore excluded from cover under s32(1)(c) of the Accident Compensation Act 2001; accordingly the appeal is dismissed.
17 Dec 2015

Blincoe v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2015] NZACC 386
Court

District Court

On the balance of probabilities the evidence did not establish that the 12 October 2012 incident caused a traumatic rupture producing the incisional hernia; contemporaneous medical records, delay in symptoms, ultrasound appearance and expert opinion attributing the hernia to prior surgery and underlying risk factors made gradual or treatment-related causes more likely, so ACC's decision to decline cover was correctly upheld.
19 Dec 2014

Wright Estate of v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2014] NZACC 348
Court

District Court

The appeal is allowed because ACC's decision rested on incorrect premises and an inadequate investigation; the court held ACC must reconsider and make a fresh decision after obtaining focused, fact‑based expert opinion addressing whether the incisional hernia was an ordinary consequence of the laparotomy or resulted from treatment failure (including alleged inadequate wound closure and post-operative care).
24 Dec 2013

Howland v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2014] NZACC 8
Court

District Court

The Court held that causation was not established on the balance of probabilities because the Pfannenstiel caesarean incision and prior infra‑umbilical surgeries did not disrupt tissues above the umbilicus where the hernia was located, there was no evidence the caesarean affected supra‑umbilical tissues, and medical opinion supported that the defect was most likely related to pregnancy‑related divarication rather than the surgical incision; therefore no entitlement to ACC cover under the Act.
17 Aug 2000

O'Connor v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2000] NZACC 210
Court

District Court

The appellant discharged the onus on the balance of probabilities by adducing uncontradicted expert medical evidence (Mr Cheng) that the 1999 incisional hernia resulted from a series of lifting events applying intra-abdominal pressure to a surgically weakened abdominal wall, satisfying the statutory definition of an "accident" (specific event or series of events and not a gradual process); accordingly the respondent's decision to decline cover was revoked and cover was granted.

New Zealand Case Law

Carpenter v Accident Compensation Corporation

Blincoe v Accident Compensation Corporation

Wright Estate of v Accident Compensation Corporation

Howland v Accident Compensation Corporation

O'Connor v Accident Compensation Corporation