New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Retrospective certification

Legal area

Court

10 Jun 2013

Mabey v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2013] NZACC 159
Court

District Court

ACC correctly declined retrospective weekly compensation because appellant unreasonably refused to provide consent and undergo medical investigation under s55, and on the available evidence (including contemporaneous 1997 records and later expert reports) appellant failed to discharge the onus of proving that the 1997 accident caused continuous incapacity to perform his pre-injury employment; appeal dismissed.
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.
12 May 2009

F v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2009] NZACC 74
Court

District Court

Weight was given to the contemporaneous counselling records of Michael‑Ann Benton together with psychiatric opinions (Drs Rosic and Newburn); on the balance of probabilities the court inferred PTSD caused incapacity from April 1996 and allowed the appeal to set the date of incapacity at April 1996.
4 Apr 2006

Vincent v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2006] NZACC 79
Court

District Court

Appeal allowed because ACC failed to prove the appellant had regained capacity in terms of s103 while employed at the Tyre Doctor and, in any event, the employment was not medically sustainable so the appellant became incapacitated immediately before ceasing employment; therefore he was an earner at the time incapacity commenced and entitled to weekly compensation (decision set aside and entitlement reinstated).
29 Jun 2004

M v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2004] NZACC 179
Court

District Court

The Judge's findings were factual and supported by the evidence: there was no contemporaneous medical evidence of incapacity as at 4 September 1991, the appellant had a pre-existing alcohol dependency not shown to be a sequela of the assault, and the preferred medical opinion did not establish that the appellant was incapacitated by mental consequences of the assault at the relevant time; accordingly no error of law was shown and leave to appeal was dismissed.
12 Nov 2003

McIlwaine v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2003] NZACC 282
Court

District Court

On the balance of probabilities the appellant failed to prove that he was incapacitated as of 4 September 1991 by mental consequences of the 16 June 1991 assault because (1) there is no contemporaneous medical evidence of mental incapacity at that time, (2) specialist evidence of Dr Davis and Dr Farrar establishes pre-existing and predominant non-accident causes (notably long-standing alcohol dependency and subsequent bipolar disorder), and (3) the causal link between the assault and later mental disorders is not sufficiently established; accordingly the appeal is dismissed.

New Zealand Case Law

Mabey v Accident Compensation Corporation

Flachs v Accident Compensation Corporation v Accident Compensation Corporation

F v Accident Compensation Corporation

Vincent v Accident Compensation Corporation

M v Accident Compensation Corporation

McIlwaine v Accident Compensation Corporation