Gordon v Accident Compensation Corporation (Treatment Injury) [2025] NZACC 122 (30 July 2025) [PDF, 188 KB] Treatment injury - s 32 Accident Compensation Act 2001. Appeal against decision to decline cover for a treatment injury. Claim did not meet required criteria. Evidence indicated medical conditions were underlying and not caused by treatment. Outcome: appeal dismissed.
Dewsnap v Accident Compensation Corporation (Impairment assessment) [2025] NZACC 121 [PDF, 209 KB] Impairment assessment – sch 1(3), Accident Compensation Act 2001. Whether Corporation correctly decided hearing loss was attributable to covered causes and whether WPI was 22 per cent. No medical assessment disputing assessment of hearing loss. No expert compelling evidence WPI assessment was flawed or incorrect. Corporation correctly decided that hearing loss was attributable to covered causes and WPI assessment was 22 per cent. Outcome: appeal dismissed.
Heagney v Accident Compensation Corporation (Weekly Compensation) [2025] NZACC 120 (28 July 2025) [PDF, 185 KB] Claim for weekly compensation - s 15, Sch 1 cls 30-32 Accident Compensation Act 2001. Appeal against decision declining weekly compensation. Corporation correctly declined Appellant's application for weekly compensation. Appellant was not in receipt of any shareholder employee earnings on the date of his accident. Outcome: appeal dismissed.
NE v Accident Compensation Corporation (Leave to Appeal to High Court) [2025] NZACC 188 [PDF, 144 KB] Leave to Appeal to the High Court – s 162 Accident Compensation Act 2001. Whether Reviewer was correct to dismiss application for want of jurisdiction. Applicant had not established judge any error of law capable of bona fide and serious argument. Outcome: appeal dismissed and no issue as to costs.
Wood v Accident Compensation Corporation (Revision of decision made in error) [2025] NZACC 119 [PDF, 159 KB] Review of decision made in error – s 65 Accident Compensation Act 2001. Code of ACC Claimants' Rights jurisdiction – s 149(3) Accident Compensation Act 2001. Whether Court has jurisdiction to determine appeals from a complaint under the Code. Whether Corporation allowed to revise decision. No jurisdiction to hear appeal. Error not established where there is simply credible difference of expert opinion. Outcome: appeal dismissed and no issue as to costs.
Ataera v Accident Compensation Corporation (Personal Injury) [2025] NZACC 117 [PDF, 197 KB] Personal injury - s 26(1)(c) Accident Compensation Act 2001. Appeal against decision declining cover for mental injury. Whether mental health issue was caused by physical injury. Physical injury provided circumstances for mental health issue but was not a material cause of it. Outcome: appeal dismissed.
Thorogood v Accident Compensation Corporation (Cover) [2025] NZACC 115 (17 July 2025) [PDF, 301 KB] Cover - ss 20, 25, 26, 67, 100-103 Accident Compensation Act 2001. Whether lumbar disc prolapse caused by a fall Appellant experienced. Weight of medical evidence supports disc injury caused by the accident Appellant experienced so Appellant entitled to cover. Appeal allowed.
Fox-Warren v Accident Compensation Corporation (Treatment injury/Revocation of Cover) [2025] NZACC 116 (16 July 2025) [PDF, 176 KB] Revocation of cover for treatment injury - ss 32, 65 Accident Compensation Act 2001. Appeal against decision revoking cover for dental treatment injury. Medical evidence indicated the Corporation correctly revoked cover for the treatment injury. Outcome: appeal dismissed.
LG v Accident Compensation Corporation (Claim for personal injury) [2025] NZACC 114 [PDF, 214 KB] Appeal against the Reviewer’s decision. Appeal against the Corporations decisions declining cover for mental injury – s 26, treatment injury – s 32 and claim for unreasonable delay – s 134(1)(b) Accident Compensation Act 2001. Whether the Corporation correctly declined cover for the various conditions and costs. Whether there was unreasonable delay. Whether there was a treatment injury caused by delay in diagnosis of autism/neurogenic bowel. Held: weight of medical evidence supported Corporation’s decision to decline cover for various conditions, these were not caused by the sexual abuse but were pre-existing or developmental. Outcome: Appeals dismissed.
Rumney v Accident Compensation Corporation (Cover and Cost of Treatment) [2025] NZACC 113 (14 July 2025) [PDF, 252 KB] Cover and cost of treatment - ss 20, 25, 26, Sch 1 cl 2(1)(a) Accident Compensation Act 2001. Appeal against decisions declining cover and surgery for a back injury. Weight of evidence did not indicate that the accident caused the injury. Insufficient evidence to indicate whether injury cause was degenerative or traumatic. Outcome: appeal dismissed.
Featherby v Accident Compensation Corporation (Revocation of Cover) [2025] NZACC 110 (9 July 2025) [PDF, 189 KB] Cover - s 65 Accident Compensation Act 2001. Appeal against review of weekly compensation and revocation of cover for foot injury. Insufficient grounds to modify or quash decisions. Outcome: appeal dismissed.
LS v Accident Compensation Corporation (Late filing to the District Court) [2025] NZACC 109 [PDF, 151 KB] Late filing of an appeal to the District Court – s 151, Accident Compensation Act 2001. Whether interests of justice required exercise of Court’s discretion to sustain application for leave to file appeal out of time. Delay of nearly two years is a significant amount of time, but delay arose out of circumstances beyond control. Outcome: application granted.
Enviro NZ Services Ltd v Accident Compensation Corporation (Work-Related Personal Injury) [2025] NZACC 111 [PDF, 290 KB] Cover for work-related personal injury - ss 28, 30 Accident Compensation Act 2001. Appeal of decision upholding Corporation's decision to grant cover for shoulder pain granted to claimant. Claimant's injury was not attributed to an accident during Claimant's employment. Held: Corporation's decision was made in error. Appeal allowed. Appellant entitled to costs.
Sheleg v Accident Compensation Corporation (Cover for Mental Injury) [2025] NZACC 106 (3 July 2025) [PDF, 208 KB] Claim for Mental Injury - s 21B Accident Compensation Act 2001. Whether the Corporation correctly declined cover for post-traumatic stress disorder on basis cover not available for mental injuries caused by stress or other gradual processes at work. Appellant's injury caused by cumulative effect of series of stressful events and Appellant had not directly seen, heard or experienced single event which could reasonably be expected to mental injury to people generally. Appeal dismissed.
Ratnam v Accident Compensation Corporation (Leave to appeal application) [2025] NZACC 107 [PDF, 141 KB] Leave to appeal application – s 149 Accident Compensation Act 2001. Whether entitled to deemed cover. Whether Corporation correctly suspended entitlements. Whether Reviewer correctly awarded only certain of requested costs. Sufficient grounds not established to sustain application. Outcome: application dismissed. No issue as to costs.
KX v Accident Compensation Corporation (Entitlement to Loss of Potential Earnings) [2025] NZACC 108 [PDF, 253 KB] Entitlement to loss of potential earnings – the prescribed base rate – cls 42(3), 47, sch 1, Accident Compensation Act 2001. Whether Corporation's calculation of LOPE entitlement accurate. Corporation prescribed base rate has been correctly applied. Appellant being paid at adult minimum wage. Outcome: appeal dismissed.
Smith v Accident Compensation Corporation (Costs of appeal) [2025] NZACC 105 [PDF, 131 KB] Costs of appeal – s 149 Accident Compensation Act 2001. Whether Appellant liable for costs. Outcome: Appeal dismissed. Appellant ordered to pay Respondent $2,196.50 in costs.
GY & KS v Accident Compensation Corporation (Treatment Injury) [2025] NZACC 100 [PDF, 308 KB] Treatment injury - ss 32 and 33 Accident Compensation Act 2001. Appeal against decision declining cover for continuation of pregnancy in the presence of an undisclosed serious fetal abnormality. Purpose of treatment was to avoid the outcome the appellants suffered. Treatment was material cause of the appellants personal injury. Outcome: appeal allowed.
Russell v Accident Compensation Corporation (Personal Injury) [2025] NZACC 104 (27 June 2025) [PDF, 181 KB] Personal injury - s 26 Accident Compensation Corporation 2001. Appellant sought cover for a whiplash injury from a digger accident, weekly compensation, and funding for treatment. Medical evidence indicated a causal link between Appellant's symptoms and the accident. Appellant entitled to cover. Outcome: appeal allowed.
Edwards v Accident Compensation Corporation (Costs on Appeal) [2025] NZACC 099 [PDF, 122 KB] Costs on appeal – s 149 Accident Compensation Act 2001. Costs awarded reduced to reflect success on partial basis only. Outcome: Respondent ordered to pay Appellant $885 in costs.
Mullins v Accident Compensation Corporation (Treatment Injury) [2025] NZACC 103 [PDF, 242 KB] Treatment Injury – s 32 Accident Compensation Act 2001. Whether appellant suffered treatment injury due to delayed administration of steroid treatment for sudden hearing loss. Medical evidence did not establish, on the balance of probabilities, that earlier treatment would have led to better outcome. Outcome: appeal dismissed.
NE v Accident Compensation Corporation (Applications to Recall and Rescind Orders of the Court) [2025] NZACC 101 [PDF, 231 KB] Applications to Recall and Rescind Orders of the Court. Whether there are grounds to recall, rescission and reinstatement. Court has inherent powers to make unless orders and strike out proceedings for non-compliance. Order dismissing 17 appeals are not rescinded or recalled. Outcome: applications dismissed.
Mota v Accident Compensation Corporation (Leave to Appeal to High Court) [2025] NZACC 102 (19 June 2025) [PDF, 190 KB] Leave to Appeal to High Court – s 162 Accident Compensation Act 2001. Whether the District erred in law in upholding ACC’s decision to revoke deemed cover, suspend entitlements, and decline surgery funding. No error in law capable of bona fide and serious argument in original decision. Outcome: application dismissed.
Merso v Accident Compensation Corporation (Leave to Appeal to High Court) [2025] NZACC 096 [PDF, 216 KB] Leave to Appeal to High Court - s 162 Accident Compensation Act 2001. Whether the District Court erred in law in upholding ACC’s decision on the level of funded attendant care, and whether leave to appeal to the High Court should be granted. No error of law in the original decision. Outcome: application to appeal is dismissed.
Hunter v Accident Compensation Corporation (Leave to Appeal to High Court) [2025] NZACC 97 (13 June 2025) [PDF, 170 KB] Leave to appeal to the High Court - s 162 Accident Compensation Act 2001. Whether sufficient grounds, as a matter of law, to sustain his application for leave to appeal. No error of law capable of bona fide and serious argument. Outcome: appeal dismissed.