Use the search function below to find recent ACADCR decisions. For older decisions, see:
939 items matching your search terms
Claim for deemed decision - Claim for work-related personal injury - ss 28, 30, 135, 146 Accident Compensation Act 2001 - Appeal against a decision allowing cover for a work-related injury. Injury caused by a gradual process not an injury caused by accident. Outcome: appeal allowed.
Review Rights - s 162 Accident Compensation Act 2001. Appeal against decision declining reimbursement for rehabilitation costs. No jurisdiction to consider application for leave to appeal. Outcome: appeal dismissed.
Claim for costs on appeal - Part 14 District Court Rules 2014. Respondent ordered to pay Appellant $544.50 Outcome: costs awarded.
Late filing of an appeal to the District Court - s 151 Accident Compensation Act 2001. Whether interests of justice required the exercise of discretion to sustain his application for leave to file his appeals out of time. Interests of justice established for appeal. Outcome: appeal granted.
Claim for work-related gradual process injury - ss 28, 30 Accident Compensation Act 2001. Appeal against decision awarding cover for Covid-19 as a work-related injury. Appellant was at a place for purpose of his employment when he was staying at a hotel for an airline layover. Outcome: appeal dismissed.
Interpretation of decision - s 6(1) Accident Compensation Act 2001. Appeal against dismissal of decision for want of jurisdiction. Court did not consider it appropriate or within its jurisdiction to address issues raised by Appellant. Outcome: appeal dismissed.
Claim for interest on weekly compensation - s 114(1) Accident Compensation Act 2001. Backdated weekly compensation - s 105, cl 43, Sch 1. Alleged delay - s 134(1)(b). Appeal from previous decisions regarding interest on payments and incapacity to work. Outcome: claim dismissed.
Weekly Compensation; shareholder-employee – s 15, Schedule 1 clauses 31, 39, 41, 42, Accident Compensation Act 2001. Whether Corporation exercised s 15(1)(b) discretion in error when deciding not to undertake s 15(3) calculation; whether Corporation correct that nil shareholder-earnings were reasonable representation of appellant’s earnings. Corporation was correct in determining appellant had nil earnings as shareholder-employee in relevant year for purpose of calculating base weekly compensation. Outcome: appeal dismissed.
Code of ACC Claimants’ Rights – s 40; Appeals process – s 149(3); Decision – s 6(1), Accident Compensation Act 2001. Whether Reviewer correctly declined jurisdiction in relation to appellant’s letter of complaint. Whether Court had jurisdiction to consider appeal. Appellant’s letter constituted complaint under Code; Reviewer had jurisdiction to hear and decide upon review. S 149(3) bar on Court’s jurisdiction did not apply. Outcome: appeal allowed.
Revocation of cover; claim for personal injury; suspension of entitlements – ss 20, 26, 65, 117, Accident Compensation Act 2001. Whether Corporation’s decisions to revoke cover for pyogenic arthritis, to decline cover for shoulder injury, and to suspend entitlement to weekly compensation and home help, were correct. On basis of evidence, Corporation’s decisions were correct. Outcome: appeal dismissed.
Payment or Contribution to Costs of Treatment - Clause 1 and 2, Schedule 1 ACC Act 2001. Whether the Corporation was correct in declining to fund further costs of treatment and travel to attend treatment. The Corporation was incorrect in declining costs for treatment and associated travel. Thus, the decision is reversed. The appellant’s need for treatment arises from her head injury of 21 January 1992 and the subsequent head injuries she suffered. Outcome: appeal allowed.
Claim for costs on appeal. Director of appellant company sought $2,159 and $1,079.50 awards of costs. No jurisdiction to award costs to self-represented litigants. Outcome: claim dismissed.
Late filing of an appeal to the District Court - s 151 Accident Compensation Act 2001. Whether interests of justice required the exercise of discretion to sustain his application for leave to file his appeals out of time. Interests of justice established for appeal. Outcome: appeal granted.
Late filing of an appeal to the District Court - s 151 Accident Compensation Act 2001. Whether interests of justice required the exercise of discretion to sustain his application for leave to file his appeals out of time. Interests of justice established for appeal. Outcome: appeal granted.
Claim for personal injury – ss 20, 25, 26, Accident Compensation Act 2001. Whether condition caused by accident injury. Appellant failed to establish on balance of probabilities that condition was caused by accident. Outcome: appeal dismissed.
Late filing of an appeal to the District Court – s151, Accident Compensation Act 2001. Whether interest of justice required exercise of Court’s discretion to sustain application for leave to file appeal out of time. Delay arose out of health issues. Outcome: application granted.
Leave to Appeal to the High Court – Section 162 Accident Compensation Act 2001. Whether sufficient grounds, as matter of law, to sustain application for leave to appeal. Appellant failed to establish error of law capable of bona fide and serious argument. Outcome: appeal dismissed.
Personal injury, causation, s 26 Accident Compensation Act 2001. Appeal against review decision declining cover. Whether right knee medial compartment osteoarthritis caused by accident. Evidence shows condition present before accident. Outcome: appeal dismissed.
Impairment Assessment - Accident Compensation Act 2001, Schedule 1, Part 3. Appeal against review decision assessing impairment. Whether impairment correctly assessed. Held: Corporation correct to decline lump sum and independence allowance. Impairment correctly assessed in accordance with statutory provisions. Outcome: appeal dismissed.
Leave to Appeal to the High Court – Section 162 Accident Compensation Act 2001. Whether sufficient grounds, as matter of law, to sustain application for leave to appeal. Appellant failed to establish error of law capable of bona fide and serious argument. Outcome: appeal dismissed.
Claim for cover and entitlement to surgery – ss 20, 25, 26, 67 Accident Compensation Act 2001. Whether Corporation correctly declined appellant’s claim for cover and surgery funding. Weight of evidence suggested appellant’s symptoms not due to fracture from accident but arthritic process. Corporation correctly declined cover and surgery funding. Outcome: claim dismissed.
Claim for personal injury - s 26 Accident Compensation Act 2001. Appeal against review decision declining cover. Whether attempted suicide met criteria for being a personal injury. Corporation should address appellant's claim in context of treatment injury and Court of Appeal's recent judgment. Corporation to undertake fresh assessment. Outcome: appeal allowed.
Work-related gradual process injury – s 30(3) Accident Compensation Act 2001. Appeal against review decision declining cover. Whether appellant established work-related exposure to organic solvents caused chronic induced encephalopathy. Appellant established, on balance of probabilities, that chronic induced encephalopathy was caused by work-related exposure. Review decision set aside. Outcome: appeal allowed.
Claim for deemed cover – s 58 Accident Compensation Act 2001. Whether appellant entitled to deemed cover for chronic regional pain syndrome. Appellant never made claim for cover for syndrome, only for original injury, therefore not entitled to deemed cover. Outcome: appeal dismissed.
Leave to Appeal to the High Court – Section 162 Accident Compensation Act 2001. Whether sufficient grounds, as matter of law, to sustain application for leave to appeal. Appellant failed to establish error of law capable of bona fide and serious argument. Outcome: appeal dismissed.