New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Noise-induced hearing loss

Legal area

Court

23 Jun 2015

Fitzgerald v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2015] NZACC 160
Court

District Court

The 2010 Regulations together with s61 apply to the appellant's 2011 replacement hearing aids claim; the independent expert evidence (Stegehuis and Manoharan) provided a lawful basis for apportionment of hearing loss to occupational and non-occupational causes; there is no residual right from earlier pre-regulatory acceptances to require full funding; the review decision to apply the Regulations and grant a contribution was not wrong and the appeal is dismissed.
4 Dec 2012

Benton v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2012] NZACC 397
Court

District Court

Accept Dr Gilbert's expert assessment that appellant's occupational noise-induced hearing loss is between 3% and 4%; that assessment is the most reliable given the lapse of time since exposure, appropriate application of age-related and post-employment deductions, and compliant audiometry; appellant failed to prove 6% or greater work-related loss required by the Act, so no entitlement to cover arises.
19 Mar 2012

Dayal v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2012] NZACC 84
Court

District Court

On a fresh consideration of the evidence and on the balance of probabilities the medical evidence establishes that the appellant's hearing loss is not attributable to occupational noise exposure from his call centre employment but is more likely degenerative/familial, therefore ACC's decision to decline cover is upheld.
16 Mar 2012

Hoar v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2012] NZACC 86
Court

District Court

On the expert medical evidence the appellant's hearing loss is attributable to age-related (presbycusis) and possibly hereditary factors rather than occupational noise exposure which ceased decades earlier; tinnitus is most probably secondary to the high-frequency hearing loss (possibly unmasked by trauma); absent expert evidence to the contrary, ACC's decision to decline cover was correct and the appeal must be dismissed.
6 Sept 2010

Milne v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2010] NZACC 154
Court

District Court

At the snapshot date (9 November 2004) the medical and factual evidence established that the appellant's cessation of flying and employment related to psychiatric conditions, not her covered hearing loss/tinnitus, and no specialist concluded that her hearing/tinnitus incapacitated her at that time; therefore she failed to prove incapacity caused by the covered injury and is not entitled to weekly compensation.

New Zealand Case Law

Fitzgerald v Accident Compensation Corporation

Benton v Accident Compensation Corporation

Dayal v Accident Compensation Corporation

Hoar v Accident Compensation Corporation

Milne v Accident Compensation Corporation