New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Work trials

Legal area

Court

15 Dec 2015

Samuel v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2015] NZACC 380
Court

District Court

The Court preferred the comprehensive VIMA of Dr Antoniadis and the VIOA based on generic work type detail sheets; the appellant failed to demonstrate that the generic descriptions were unrealistic or that rehabilitation or work trials were insufficient to preclude vocational independence; accordingly the appellant has achieved vocational independence in the job types automobile driver NEC and forklift operator for 30 hours per week.
29 Sept 2015

Thompson v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2015] NZACC 294
Court

District Court

On a holistic appellate assessment the Court concluded Dr Kahan had overestimated the appellant's practical work capacity; the work trial did not demonstrably establish capacity, and the combined effects of ankle and shoulder pain, limited sitting/concentration, limited computer skills and depressive symptoms meant the respondent did not establish vocational independence as at March 2010; therefore the March 2010 decision was set aside and entitlements reinstated.
30 Oct 2014

Swain v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2014] NZACC 281
Court

District Court

The VIMA failed to address the significant limitation of the claimant's inability to tolerate prolonged sitting for five of seven work types, rendering those five medically unsuitable; however two work types (admissions clerk and office cashier) did not require constant sitting and were both occupationally and medically suitable, therefore the claimant had vocational independence and the appeal was dismissed.
23 Nov 2012

Koppan v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2012] NZACC 383
Court

District Court

The Court held that the vocational and medical assessments, taken together and conducted by qualified assessors considering the FCE, medical reports and occupational reports, were reasonable and not so deficient as to invalidate the vocational independence decision; absence of a work trial and criticisms of the FCE created caution but did not materially undermine the assessments, so the appeal was dismissed.
13 Jul 2012

Griffin v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2012] NZACC 231
Court

District Court

On the balance of medical and vocational evidence the Court found insufficient proof that the claimant could safely perform forklift driving given repetitive push‑pull wrist demands, but sufficient evidence that he was capable of delivery driving in a light vehicle with the literacy and basic recording tasks demonstrated in work trials; therefore ACC's vocational independence decision was not set aside and the appeal was dismissed.
11 Feb 2009

O'Connor v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2009] NZACC 15
Court

District Court

The Court held that the occupational and medical assessments were conducted by suitably qualified assessors in accordance with the statutory process, that the assessors accounted for pain and literacy issues in reaching their conclusions, and that the appellant failed to produce cogent, contemporaneous evidence sufficient to show the assessments were flawed; accordingly the vocational independence decision stood and the appeal was dismissed.
28 Feb 2008

Jackson v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2008] NZACC 45
Court

District Court

The medical assessment was legally deficient because it failed to transparently address and explain how the appellant could sustain work involving constant sitting or constant standing given prior medical concerns about pain and sustained posture; additionally the library assistant job, being identified only at the vocational independence stage and involving untested lifting/bending/trolley tasks, had not been adequately rehabilitated or practically trialed and therefore reliance on that sole job to find vocational independence was flawed; consequently the Corporation's decision of 14 Februar…
11 Dec 2007

Storer v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2007] NZACC 260
Court

District Court

The authorised medical assessor's opinion (Dr Marshall) was not shown to be clearly and cogently flawed by specialist evidence; his explanation that the required repetitive tasks were non-loaded and would not exacerbate the cervical nerve condition was adequate, therefore the PPCS decision that the appellant attained Vocational Independence is upheld and the appeal is dismissed.
13 Nov 2007

Millar v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2007] NZACC 247
Court

District Court

The appeal is dismissed because the respondent's vocational independence occupational and medical assessments were not shown to be materially flawed; rehabilitation had been taken as far as practicable given the appellant's participation; documentary errors were formal rather than substantive; the appellant failed to adduce cogent current specialist medical evidence demonstrating that chronic pain made the assessed light‑duties sales work unsustainable; and there was no demonstrable denial of natural justice that would vitiate the decision.
17 Jan 2007

Cade v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2007] NZACC 13
Court

District Court

The Court found the Corporation did not fail in its obligation under the IRP and had reasonable grounds to consider vocational independence likely; the claimant did not engage sufficiently to require further graduated work trials, the IRP did not obligate retraining sought by the claimant, and Dr Wright’s clinical judgment (that the claimant could work 35+ hours in specified light jobs) was not shown to be flawed—therefore the decision confirming vocational independence stands.