New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Retrospective payment

Legal area

Court

10 Mar 2008

Nicholl v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2008] NZACC 53
Court

District Court

Leave to appeal was refused because no question of law capable of bona fide and serious argument was identified: the Hot Pools are not a 'Treatment Provider' under s.6 so there is no statutory entitlement to retrospective reimbursement of the pass and travel; ancillary/IRP payment required prior ACC agreement and could not be applied retrospectively; and review rights under the Accident Insurance Act 1998 expired and cannot be extended.
23 Jan 2008

Anderson v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2008] NZACC 8
Court

District Court

The court found that specialist evidence established ongoing cognitive and volitional impairments attributable to the appellant's covered solvent neurotoxicity rather than to discrete psychiatric episodes; the alleged post-1996 deterioration was overstated and did not break the causal link to the covered injury. Consequently the appellant is entitled to attendant care arising from the covered injury and the respondent must assess the precise quantum and make payments from 24 March 2003.
18 Nov 1997

Bojesen-Trepka v Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Corporation

Citation

[1997] NZACC 232
Court

District Court

Regulation 11, read with s27 of the Act, does not permit retrospective approval or payment for private surgical procedures; the appellant failed to obtain the required prior approval and did not establish a statutory exception, therefore the Corporation cannot be required to reimburse the costs and the appeal is dismissed.

New Zealand Case Law

Nicholl v Accident Compensation Corporation

Anderson v Accident Compensation Corporation

Bojesen-Trepka v Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Corporation