New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Investigation obligations

Legal area

Court

16 Jun 2016

Knight v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2016] NZACC 174
Court

District Court

The Court held the appellant failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that he was incapacitated in 2012 as a result of the 2000 covered injury or that any incapacity was continuous from the accident to 2012; the backdated GP certificate was inadequate without corroboration and conflicting specialist reports raised causation doubts, so weekly compensation entitlement could not be reinstated on the evidence before the Court, though further investigation by ACC was warranted.
22 Feb 2012

Flachs v Accident Compensation Corporation v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2012] NZACC 57
Court

District Court

The Court allowed the appeal because ACC unreasonably failed to make further inquiries (such as obtaining independent occupational/medical advice) in the face of credible evidence and explanations; accordingly the review decision refusing weekly compensation was quashed and ACC was directed to obtain independent advice on whether, on available evidence, the appellant was probably unable to continue as a cabinetmaker without aggravating the injury.
10 Feb 2012

McMillan v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2012] NZACC 46
Court

District Court

The appeal is dismissed because, on the balance of probabilities, the appellant failed to establish that an accident caused the alleged cervical disc prolapse: contemporaneous records and inconsistent accounts undermined credibility and causation, and the brief supporting medical letter without analysis did not discharge the burden to show an accident-related injury, so ACC was not obliged to perform further investigation.
5 Apr 2011

Estate of Gibbs-Love v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2011] NZACC 104
Court

District Court

Judge Barber held there was no seriously arguable question of law because the District Court's decision was grounded in a substantial body of specialist medical evidence establishing death from cerebral palsy, ACC's investigation was adequate under s 57, alleged omissions regarding Baclofen Withdrawal Syndrome did not amount to an error of law, and therefore leave to appeal was properly refused.
28 Sept 2009

Esapour v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2009] NZACC 155
Court

District Court

Section 58 provides a remedy only for failures to meet statutory time limits in s56 or s57; inadequate quality of investigation or omission of review-rights information does not trigger s58 deeming. The Reviewer’s power to quash and direct further investigation under s145 is the correct remedy for deficient investigations. On the facts ACC obtained the claimant's agreement to extension and issued its decision within the agreed period, so s58 did not apply; the appeal is dismissed.
24 Apr 2009

Rongonui v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2009] NZACC 69
Court

District Court

The Reviewer correctly declined jurisdiction over a s21 mental injury claim because the Corporation had never made a primary decision on such a claim; the correct remedy was for ACC to issue primary decisions on whether pepper spray caused additional physical injury and whether a s21 mental injury claim arises, and the Court directs ACC to do so; appeal otherwise dismissed.
16 Oct 2008

Evans v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2008] NZACC 255
Court

District Court

The Corporation did not conduct a sufficient investigation under s56 given conflicting medical records and the proximity of the cricket impact to the knee inflammation; a considered medical opinion was required to determine causation, so the review decision was quashed and the respondent's decision set aside and remitted for further investigation and a new decision.
13 Sept 2006

Merriman v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2006] NZACC 219
Court

District Court

Appeal dismissed because the appellant failed to discharge the onus of proving, on the balance of probabilities, a causal link between omeprazole and eosinophilic bronchitis; a persuasive body of specialist opinion found no established association and ACC's investigation was reasonable, so mere possibility or temporal coincidence was insufficient to establish medical misadventure.