New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Industrial deafness

Legal area

Court

18 Oct 1996

Winstone Aggregates Limited v Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Corporation

Citation

[1996] NZACC 116
Court

District Court

Because the review was part‑heard by one Review Officer and was later decided by a different Review Officer on the papers without informing the appellant or offering a further hearing, the appellant was denied the right of audience and procedural fairness; the appeal is allowed and the review decision is set aside with costs awarded to the appellant.
6 Mar 1996

Sampson v Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Corporation

Citation

[1996] NZACC 6
Court

District Court

The literal wording of s29(3) of the Accident Compensation Act 1982 must be applied so that the date of injury for industrial deafness is the deemed date specified; where that deemed date falls after repeal and within the transitional period it does not attract benefits under the 1982 Act and a purposive construction cannot be used to override clear statutory language.
19 Dec 1995

King v Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Corporation

Citation

(1995) 1 BACR 143
Court

District Court

Because s29(3) of the 1982 Act deems industrial deafness to have occurred on the later of the claim date or last leaving the hazardous occupation, and the claim date here was 3 September 1992 (after 1 July 1992), the 1982 Act does not apply; the claim must be determined under the 1992 Act and the appellant is not eligible for a lump sum award under the 1982 Act.
9 May 1995

Watson v Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Corporation

Citation

[1995] NZACC 45
Court

District Court

The appeal is dismissed because the appellant did not prove, on the balance of probabilities, that his hearing loss was caused by a gradual process arising out of and in the course of his employment; material inconsistencies in his work history, lack of corroborating evidence and the possibility of age-related hearing loss meant the s7 criteria were not satisfied and the respondent was entitled to decline the claim.
7 Mar 1995

Sutcliffe v Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Corporation

Citation

[1995] NZACC 20
Court

District Court

The judge held that 'personal injury' refers to the physical injury (deafness) and that Dr Lindsay treated the appellant for deafness in August 1984; therefore s.7(5)(a) fixed the date of the personal injury as 1984, predating the 1992 Act, entitling the appellant to lump sum compensation under the earlier Act and requiring revocation of the Corporation's decision.

New Zealand Case Law

Winstone Aggregates Limited v Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Corporation

Sampson v Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Corporation

King v Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Corporation

Watson v Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Corporation

Sutcliffe v Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Corporation