Ministry of Justice

Classification of industries or risks - s 170 Accident Compensation Act 2001. Appeal against ACC's decision which determined that the Appellant's business activities did not satisfy the criteria to hold multiple classification units. Whether Appellant satisfies requirement set out in s 170(3), which enables ACC to exercise its discretion to classify Appellant into separate classification units for different activites. Outcome: Appeal dismissed.

Claim for costs on appeal. Appellant's lay advocate sought $9,845 in costs. Calculation based on one Category 2 rate. Outcome: calculation made on Category 1 rate. Respondent order to pay Appellant's lay advocate $1,651. Appeal allowed in part.

Causation, Treatment Injury - s 32 Accident Compensation Act 2001. Appeal against decision declining cover for treatment injury. Whether treatment failure caused Appellant's death. No causation link between death from aspiration pneumonia and care received. Outcome: appeal dismissed.

Claim for overseas personal injury - s 17(2) Accident Compensation Act 2001. Appeal from decision to decline appellant's claim for cover for mental injury in relation to historic sexual abuse suffered by her outside of New Zealand. Appellant remained absent from New Zealand for a period of six months and one week. Corporation correctly declined the appellant cover on the basis that she was not ordinarily resident in New Zealand at the time the causative criminal events occurred. Previous decision of Reviewer upheld. Outcome: appeal dismissed.

Late filing of an appeal to the District Court – s 151 Accident Compensation Act 2001. Whether the interests of justice required the exercise of discretion to sustain his application to file his appeal out of time. Interests of justice established for appeal. Delay arose due to delay in receiving a copy of the Reviewer’s decision. Outcome: appeal granted.

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.

Late filing of an appeal to the District Court - s 151 Accident Compensation Act 2001. Delay due to misunderstanding over review hearing postponement. Whether interests of justice required the exercise of discretion to sustain his application for leave to file his appeal out of time. Delay arose out of an inadvertence. Interests of justice established for appeal. Outcome: appeal granted.

Claim for costs on review and other costs - ss 148 and 262(4) Accident Compensation Act 2001. Appeal against review decision declining cover for funding for support person, transport and advocate costs. Reviewer correctly declined cover. No provision which required Corporation to pay transport, support person or advocate costs. Review decision upheld. Outcome: appeal declined.

Late filing of an appeal to the District Court - s 151 Accident Compensation Act 2001. Delay due to review decision email going to spam. Whether interests of justice required the exercise of discretion to sustain his application for leave to file his appeal out of time. Interests of justice established for appeal. Delay arose out of inadvertence. Outcome: appeal granted.

Suspension of weekly entitlement - s 117(1), claim of delay – s 134(1)(b), claim for review costs - s 148(2)(b) Accident Compensation Act 2001. Whether Corporation's decision suspending applicant's entitlement to weekly compensation was wrong in fact and law and in relation to costs not being awarded. In light of Corporation's decision to revoke earlier suspension decision, appeal regarding suspension of weekly compensation dismissed. Appeal in relation to costs of second review application dismissed. Applicant entitled to costs of this appeal. 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. Delay arose out of error or inadvertence rather than indecision. Outcome: appeal granted.

Claim for costs on discontinuance of appeal. Whether conduct of appellant's advocate amounted to abuse of process. Advocate's conduct did not reach level of abuse of process. Court exercised discretion not to award costs. Outcome: claim dismissed.

Causation - 20 Accident Compensation Act 2001. Appeal against decision declining to extend cover to include a peroneal tear of her right ankle. Medical evidence supported conclusion of ankle injury. Decision reversed. Outcome: appeal allowed.