Use the search function below to find recent ACADCR decisions. For older decisions, see:
1031 items matching your search terms
Meaning of Decision, s 6 Accident Compensation Act 2001. Appeal challenging review decision determining letters from Corporation on five separate occasions were not reviewable decisions. Whether a decision has been made under s Accident Compensation Act 2001. Letters issued were administrative and not capable of being reviewed, not decisions under s 6 of the Act. Outcome: appeal dismissed.
Claim for Cover and Entitlements, pt 3 Accident Compensation Act 2001. Appeal of decision declining claim for cover for joint septic arthritis and entitlement to weekly compensation. Whether joint septic arthritis should be covered on basis: [i] it was caused by accident; or [ii] it was caused by a gradual process, disease or infection consequential on personal injury suffered by Appellant for which he has cover. Whether Appellant is entitled to weekly compensation. Whether Corporation’s decision dated 19 December 2019 was correct. Outcome: appeal dismissed.
Personal Injury/Causation s 20 – Accident Compensation Act 2001. Appeal against two decisions declining cover for surgery and declining weekly compensation for tendon injury. Whether accident caused tendon injury that required surgery. Whether incapacity due to accident. Outcome: appeal dismissed.
Leave to appeal to the High Court out of time against a review decision. Appellant failed to establish the interests of justice required the exercise of the Court's discretion to sustain his leave to appeal out of time. Outcome: appeal dismissed.
Leave to appeal. Application for leave to appeal. Whether the Respondent should be granted cover for a mental injury due to a physical injury. Sufficient grounds to sustain the Applicant's application for leave to appeal. Outcome: application granted.
Social Rehabilitation ss 81, 82 and 84 Accident Compensation Act 2001. Appeal against assessment of social rehabilitation. Whether the Respondent's decision to decrease funding should stand. Outcome: appeal dismissed.
Leave to appeal out of time against a review decision. Appellant established interests of justice required the exercise of the Court's discretion. Delay due to an undertstandable error or inadvertence. Outcome: appeal allowed.
Leave to appeal on a question of law against a review decision. Appellant did not establish sufficient grounds to sustain application for leave to appeal. Outcome: appeal dismissed.
Leave to appeal to the High Court - s 162(1) Accident Compensation Act 2001. Whether sufficient grounds, as a matter of law, to sustain her application for leave to appeal. No question of law capable of bona fide and serious argument. Outcome: appeal dismissed.
Costs following substantive judgment. Daily rate set at 50% of the daily lawyer rate based on category under the District Court Rules is appropriate. Outcome: costs award to appellant of $3,048.
Leave to appeal to the High Court regarding a claim for costs. Appellant did not establish sufficient grounds to sustain his application for leave to appeal. Outcome: appeal dismissed.
Mental injury s 26(1)(c) Accident Compensation Act 2001. Appeal against declined cover for mental injury caused by covered physical injury. Failed to assist the Corporation in the establishment of his claimed cover by undergoing a medical assessment. Appellant did not establish he has a mental injury that was suffered because of his back injury or that he has deemed cover for this injury. Outcome: appeal dismissed.
Assessment of Whole Person Impairment cls 57, 59 and 61, sch 1; Lump Sum Regulations r 4 - Accident Compensation Act 2001. Appeal against decision assessing lump sum entitlement for appellant on basis of 20% whole person impairment and appeal against refusal to undertake a reassessment of the appellant’s whole person impairment. Outcome: appeals dismissed.
Claim for mental injury - s 21 Accident Compensation Act 2001. Whether the Corporation, correctly declined the appellant cover for mental injury. The appellant has proved, on a balance of probabilities, that he has a mental injury, which was substantially caused by the sexual abuse inflicted on him. Outcome: appeal allowed.
Social Rehabilitation s 79 and 81-84 Accident Compensation Act 2001. Appeal against the respondent's decision to approve funding for the appellant's home help and community support of 4.5 hours per week. Whether respondent's discretion in assessing the appellant’s home help and attendant care needs was exercised on a wrong principle. Outcome: appeal dismissed.
Work-related injury s 28 Accident Compensation Act 2001. Appeal against declined cover for work-related injury. Whether accredited employer corrected declined the appellant's cover for a work-related injury. Outcome: appeal allowed.
Treatment injury s 32 Accident Compensation Act 2001. Appeal against decision to decline cover for a treatment injury which the deceased’s estate said caused the deceased’s demise. Whether correctly declined cover for a treatment injury, said to have been caused by treatment. Outcome: appeal dismissed.
Vocational Independence s 107 Accident Compensation Act 2001. Appeal challenging decision of Corporation finding Appellant vocationally independent in twelve work types. Whether Appellant was likely to achieve vocational independence and whether the Vocational Independence Medical Assessment (VIMA) was flawed. Appeal dismissed.
Claim for costs – s 148, Accident Compensation Act 2001. Whether the Reviewer corrected assessed the costs awarded to Mr Alves in respect of the review hearing; whether the Reviewer had jurisdiction to award additional costs claimed; and, if so, whether the Reviewer appropriately exercised discretion in not awarding additional costs. Outcome: appeal dismissed.
Claim for personal injury – ss 25–26, Accident Compensation Act 2001. Whether decision to decline appellant’s claim for cover for an umbilical hernia was correct. Appellant has established, on a balance of probabilities, that he sustained a personal injury, being a paraumbilical hernia, when pushing a barrow at work, and is entitled to cover for a work injury. Outcome: appeal allowed.
Lump sum compensation s 69(d) and cls 54, 59 Sch 1 Accident Compensation Act 2001. Whether the Respondent correctly declined the Appellant's application for lump sum compensation for permanent impairment. No error in impairment assessments found. Outcome: appeal dismissed.
Claim for independence allowance – Part 4, sch 1 of the Accident Insurance Act 1998. Appeal of decision dismissing application for review of ACC’s decision assessing appellant’s whole person impairment for an independence allowance. Where appellant’s epilepsy should be fixed on a scale of 0-14% as prescribed under Table 5 of the AMA Guides. Appellant has not established on balance that assessment on which ACC based decision was flawed or incorrect. Outcome: appeal dismissed.
Weekly compensation s 103(2) Accident Compensation Act 2001. Appeal against decision declining weekly compensation. Appellant did not establish a direct causal nexus between the earlier covered injury and the physical condition which caused his later incapacity. Outcome: appeal dismissed.
Causation s 20 Personal Injury – Accident Compensation Act 2001. Appeal of decision revoking cover for a spider bite and associated infection and the consequent development of post traumatic stress disorder. Outcome: appeal allowed. Decisions to revoke cover for spider bite and for post traumatic stress disorder are reversed. Decision to suspend entitlement to weekly compensation is reversed.
Causation s 20 Personal Injury – Accident Compensation Act 2001. Appeal of decision declining claim for left inguinal hernia. Whether the hernia caused by an accident. Given the “no hernia” finding on 9 January, not credible to conclude that hernia diagnosed 13 February was result of gradual process and not caused by girdling work undertaken that day. Outcome: appeal allowed. Decision declining claim reversed.