New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Qualifying claim

Legal area

Court

19 Dec 2014

Ali's Home Help v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2014] NZACC 340
Court

District Court

An employer cannot use a levy review under s236 to challenge whether qualifying claims are work-related personal injuries; such challenges must be brought under the specific cover-review provisions (s134) within the prescribed three month period after notice under s64(2). Further, no deemed decision arose because the August invoice was superseded by the December reassessment, and in any event exclusion of the 24 claims could not be ordered via the purported deemed decision. The appeal is dismissed.
23 Jan 2002

Bank of New Zealand v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2002] NZACC 13
Court

District Court

Sufficient clinical and specialist medical evidence established personal injury caused or contributed to by the claimant's work (s7); ACC conducted adequate investigation and sensibly exercised its discretion under s104 to attribute the payments to the employer's experience rating, so the appeal is dismissed.
2 Feb 2001

Invercargill Licensing Trust v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2001] NZACC 17
Court

District Court

On the medical factual findings adopted (notably the opinions of Dr Fountain and Dr Anderson) the claimant's disabling condition was substantively caused by a pre-existing degenerative cervical condition and complications from surgery rather than by an acute workplace strain; therefore the payments in 1993/1994 were not qualifying payments attributable to the appellant and the respondent's decision to include those costs was plainly wrong and is quashed.
20 Dec 2000

Good Health Wanganui Ltd v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2000] NZACC 345
Court

District Court

Experts agreed the 1 June 1996 head injury while in the appellant's employ precipitated the claimant's ongoing incapacity even if pre-existing minor injuries made him more susceptible; the statutory definition of "qualifying claim" was satisfied; regulation 5C(4)(b) and related provisions do not import a discretion to exclude the payments for the 1998/1999 assessment; consequently the payments are qualifying payments attributable to the appellant for experience rating and the respondent's attribution was lawful.
22 Sept 2000

Primary Producers Co-operative Society Ltd (Harrex) v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2000] NZACC 248
Court

District Court

On the preponderance of the medical evidence (original clinical records indicating tenosynovitis, reports from Dr Ching and Mr Taine, confirmation from Dr Fanning and supporting opinion from Dr Bell) the respondent properly accepted the claim as work-related and correctly exercised its discretion under s.104(1) to include the costs in the appellant's 1998/99 experience rating; the appeal is dismissed.

New Zealand Case Law

Ali's Home Help v Accident Compensation Corporation

Bank of New Zealand v Accident Compensation Corporation

Invercargill Licensing Trust v Accident Compensation Corporation

Good Health Wanganui Ltd v Accident Compensation Corporation

Primary Producers Co-operative Society Ltd (Harrex) v Accident Compensation Corporation