13 Oct 2006
The Court accepted the medical explanation that Dr Chew correctly applied the AMA Guides and ACC User Handbook and that Dr Wong's report duplicated impairments producing an inflated figure; Dr Chew's assessment of 8% WPI is correct, falls below the 10% statutory minimum for Independence Allowance, and therefore the appellant is not entitled to the allowance; the appeal is dismissed.
5 Feb 2001
Under the Accident Insurance Act 1998 the statutory assessment methodology requires use of the AMA Guides by a duly authorised assessor; where such an assessment (and peer review) results in whole person impairment which, after deduction of prior lump sum awards, falls below the statutory 10% threshold the respondent was correct to terminate the Independence Allowance and the court has no power to overturn a compliant certified assessment.
18 Oct 1999
Because a duly authorised assessor applied the AMA Guides and produced a whole person impairment assessment of 6%, which is below the statutory 10% threshold required for payment, the appellant is not entitled to an independence allowance and the Court cannot override those statutory requirements.
5 Aug 1999
Because the reassessment was carried out by a duly appointed assessor in conformity with the AMA Guides and there was no evidence the assessment was incorrect, the court accepted the assessed whole person impairment; after deducting the prior 10% lump sum allowance the residual impairment fell below the statutory 10% threshold, therefore cancellation of the independence allowance was lawful.