Ministry of Justice

Application for leave to appeal to the High Court. Appeal under s 162(1) of the Accident Compensation Act 2001. Whether District Court erred in law by finding that appellant’s mental injury was caused by a gradual process and not a single event as required by s 21B. Whether any bona fide question of law arose justifying leave to appeal to the High Court. Held: District Court correctly applied section 21B. No bona fide or seriously arguable question of law arose. Outcome: Application for leave to appeal dismissed.

Late filing of an appeal to the District Court - s 151 Accident Compensation Act 2001. Whether the District Court should exercise its discretion to file appeal outside the statutory 28-day timeframe. Appeal was filed 13 months late. Delay was significant, but reasons were personal and not due to indecision or change of mind. Interests of justice require granting leave despite lengthy delay. Outcome: application granted.

Late filing of an appeal to the District Court - s 151 Accident Compensation Act 2001. Whether the District Court should exercise its discretion to file appeal outside the statutory 28-day timeframe. Appeal was filed seven weeks late. Although reasons for full delay were not compelling, interests of justice and lack of opposition justified granting leave. Outcome: application granted.

Personal injury - Revocation of deemed cover - Unreasonable delay - ss 25, 26, 27, 65, 134(1), Sch 1 Accident Compensation Act 2001. Appeals against decision declining cover for a hand injury and spinal injury and other injuries. Evidence indicated hand injury and spinal injury and other injuries were not caused by the accidents. Corporation correctly dismissed all appeals and review for unreasonable delay. Outcome: appeals dismissed.

Late review application - s 135(3) Accident Compensation Act 2001. Appeal against decision declining late review application. Delay of 15 years was significant. No extenuating circumstances justified the late review. Corporation's decision to decline application was corrected. Outcome: appeal dismissed.  

Appeal against the reviewer’s decision. sections 135 – review applications, s136 and 137 – review process, s149(3) of the Accident Compensation Act 2001 – bar on appeals to District Court. Whether District Court has jurisdiction to hear and decide appeal by appellant. Held: s149(3) explicitly bars appeals to District Court from review decisions on Code complaints, therefore the District Court has no jurisdiction to hear the appeal. Outcome: appeal dismissed.

Application for leave to appeal to the High Court - 162 Accident Compensation Act 2001. Whether the District Court judgment involved an error of law that justified leave to appeal to the High Court. Applicant did not demonstrate that the District Court findings were legally erroneous. The threshold for leave to appeal was not met. Outcome: application dismissed.

Leave to appeal to the High Court - s 162 Accident Compensation Corporation 2001. Whether the District Court adopted the wrong test when interpreting calculation of weekly earnings on appeal of Corporation's decision that applicant was not entitled to weekly compensation as no earnings prior to commencement of incapacity. Applicant has not established error of law capable of bona fide and serious argument. No wider importance of contended point of law. Outcome: application dismissed.

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 15 days, but delay arose out of understandable error.  No history of non-cooperation or delay. No real prejudice to Corporation and Corporation did not oppose leave being granted. Outcome: application granted.

Appeal regarding multiple ACC decisions for cover for physical, mental injuries, deemed cover, and weekly compensation following several accidents. Sections 20, 25, 26, 58, 65, and 103 of the Accident Compensation Act 2001. Whether ACC correctly approved cover for various physical and mental injuries. Held: medical evidence supports ACC decision for cover for physical and mental injuries. Outcome: Appeal dismissed, reviewer’s decisions upholding ACC’s determinations were confirmed.

Work-related gradual process injury - s 30 Accident Compensation Act 2001. Appeal against decision declining cover for asthma as a work-related gradual process injury caused by exposure to mould. Accepted that the Appellant suffered from asthma. Insufficient evidence of mould in the workplace. Even if there was mould in the workplace, not established that it would cause of contribute to the Appellant suffering asthma. Outcome: appeal dismissed.

Appeal against a strike-out application and jurisdictional challenge to a review decision.  Failure to make a reviewable decision under sections 36 and 37 of the Accident Compensation Act 1982. Whether the review application was barred by res judicata, issue estoppel, and abuse of process. Whether there was any jurisdictional basis for the review. Held: Review application barred by res judicata, issues estoppel, and abuse of process- same issues had already been determined in previous proceedings between the same parties. Outcome: Appeal struck out.

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 three weeks. Delay arose out of circumstances beyond control. No history of non-cooperation or delay. No real prejudice to Corporation and Corporation did not oppose leave being granted. Outcome: application granted.