1 Nov 2013
Karati v Accident Compensation Corporation
- Citation
- [2013] NZACC 367
- Court
- District Court
The appeal is dismissed because the assessor applied the correct statutory framework and AMA Guides, the assessment (WPI 5%) was supported by an unchallenged peer review, there was no contrary medical evidence and the WPI fell below the 10% threshold for lump sum payment; the elective tubal ligation was excluded from coverage and could not increase the assessment.