Use the search function below to find recent ACADCR decisions. For older decisions, see:

NZLII decisions for ACADCR

Search results

794 items matching your search terms

  1. Reid v Accident Compensation Corporation [2023] NZACC 194 [PDF, 254 KB]

    Appeals from two decisions of a reviewer. Claim for social rehabilitation (transport) - s70, s79, and cl 22 of Schedule 1; claim for treatment injury- s32(1), Accident Compensation Act 2001. Whether ACC’s decision is correct as to the quantum of ACC’s contribution to the appellant’s transport for independence cost. Appellant has not established ACC made an error of law or principle. Second appeal: whether ACC correctly declined cover for a treatment injury on the basis that ACC had failed/delayed providing specialist psychiatric assessment for PTSD. Appellant’s claim does not qualify for treatment injury in terms of the Act. Outcome: both appeals are dismissed.

  2. Nedelcu v Accident Compensation Corporation (Suspension of Entitlements) [2023] NZACC 191 [PDF, 339 KB]

    Suspension of entitlements, Accident Compensation Act 2001, s 117; Personal injury, Accident Compensation Act 2001, s 26. Whether accident caused injury. Whether Corporation had sufficient basis to suspend entitlements. Cover given for accidental lumbar sprain, Appellant not entitled to further cover for pre-existing degenerative spinal injury. Sufficient basis to suspend entitlements. Outcome: appeal dismissed.

  3. Brunton v Accident Compensation Corporation (Treatment Injury) [2023] NZACC 187 [PDF, 382 KB]

    Treatment Injury - s 32 Accident Compensation Act 2001. Applicant claimed accident compensation on the basis that she suffered a treatment injury when undergoing upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. Corporation had declined to grant cover on basis there was no evidence to establish physical injury caused by treatment. Applicant appeals against Review Decision on ground it was incorrect. Applicant has not established on balance of probabilities that she suffered a treatment injury for which there is accident compensation cover. Outcome: appeal dismissed.

  4. Jones v Accident Compensation Corporation (Leave to Appeal) [2023] NZACC 183 [PDF, 909 KB]

    Leave to appeal to the High Court - s 162 Accident Compensation Act 2001. Applicant seeks leave to appeal on a question of law. Previous judge determined applicant had not established claim for payment of backdated weekly compensation. Applicant had suffered sinusitis. Court finds leave application does not contain any seriously arguable questions of law. Insufficient evidence to support 18 year period of weekly compensation claimed. That decision was open to the court on the facts, therefore no question of law arises. Outcome: application for leave dismissed.

  5. Lee v Accident Compensation Corporation (Work Related Gradual Process Injury) [2023] NZACC 176 [PDF, 352 KB]

    Work-related gradual process injury – s 30(3) Schedule 2 Clause 35 Accident Compensation Act 2001. Whether appellant established work-related exposure to trichloroethane caused or contributed to cause of his Parkinson’s disease. Not established on balance of probabilities that disease caused by trichloroethane exposure, as strong familial history of Parkinson’s Disease. Outcome: appeal dismissed.

  6. Wahabi v Accident Compensation Corporation (Incapacity/Backdated weekly compensation) [2023] NZACC 174 [PDF, 207 KB]

    Cover – Incapacity s 103; Backdated Weekly Compensation Accident Compensation Act 2001. Appeal against decision accepting retrospective incapacity and entitlement to backdated weekly compensation, and letter advising medical certification of incapacity required for further compensation. Decision was wholly in favour of appellant therefore any appeal against it must be refused. Letter was advice, not decision, therefore could not be appealed. Outcome: appeal dismissed.

  7. Lefeuvre v Accident Compensation Corporation (Late filing) [2023] NZACC 173 [PDF, 153 KB]

    Late filing of appeal to the District Court - s 151 Accident Compensation Act 2001. Appeal relating to Corporation declining cover and declining to fund surgery to treat tears in Appellant's shoulder. Appellant has established that interests of justice require exercise of Court's discretion. Application for leave to file out of time granted. Court draws Appellant's attention to s 161(3) Accident Compensation Act providing if an appeal is not prosecuted with due diligence Court may dismiss it. Outcome: appeal allowed.