Ministry of Justice

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.

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 appeal out of time. Interests of justice established for appeal. Delay caused by appellant's advocate and was not significant. Outcome: appeal granted.

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.

Leave to appeal to the High Court – s 162 Accident Compensation Act 2001. Whether sufficient grounds, as matter of law, to sustain application for leave to appeal. No points of law raised capable of bona fide and serious argument. Appellant’s repeated attempts to relitigate same issue cause for costs award against him. Outcome: appeal dismissed.

Late filing of an appeal to the District Court – s 151 Accident Compensation Act 2001. Whether interests of justice required exercise of discretion to sustain appellant’s application to file appeal out of time. Interests of justice established for appeal. Delay of only three days, arose from understandable error. Outcome: appeal granted.

Leave to appeal on a question of law s 162(1) Accident Compensation Act 2001. No error of law capable of bona fide and serious argument to grant leave to appeal to the High Court. Outcome: application declined.

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.

Leave to appeal to the High Court – Section 162 Accident Compensation Act 2001. Whether Court erred in admitting evidence. Whether Court correctly applied significantly greater risk test. No points of law raised capable of bona fide and serious argument. Outcome: appeal dismissed.

Employment status at time of incapacity - clause 43, First Schedule Accident Compensation Act 2001. Whether Corporation correctly declined weekly compensation on basis Appellant not earner at date of injury. Appellant had suffered treatment injury, namely subcostal nerve injury following surgery. Court finds Appellant does not qualify for weekly compensation and Court has no power to reach decision other than in accordance with plain words of clause 43. Outcome: appeal dismissed.

Late filing of appeal to District Court - s 151 Accident Compensation Act 2001. Appeal filed late because Appellant is now disabled and suffered stress caused by review process. Court finds Appellant has established interests of justice require exercise of Court's discretion to sustain her application for leave to file her appeal out of time. Appellant's attention drawn to s 161(3) and is required to comply with deadlines and court directions. Outcome: appeal allowed.

Late filing of appeal to the District Court - s 151 Accident Compensation Act 2001. Corporation had declined to make further payment of interest on back-dated weekly compensation. s 161(3) provides that if appeal not prosecuted with due diligence court may dismiss appeal. Outcome: appeal dismissed.

Late filing of an appeal to the District Court - s 151 Accident Compensation Act 2001. Corporation had declined cover for mental injury. Court finds appeal not prosecuted with due diligence. Outcome: appeal dismissed.

Personal injury, causation - s 26 Accident Compensation Corporation 2001. Appellant brings two separate appeals relating to whether he should have cover for a right hip labral tear. Whether Corporation’s decisions to decline cover for right hip labral tear were correct. Court held necessary causal nexus between accident and injury not been established. Insufficient evidence to show Corporation's decisions were incorrect. Outcome: appeals dismissed.