Alliance Group Ltd v Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Corporation

IN THE DISTRICT COURT HELD AT WELLINGTON Decision No. 112 /98 IN THE MATTER of The Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Act 1992 AND IN THE MATTER of an Appeal pursuant to Section 91 of the Act BETWEEN ALLIANCE GROUP LTD DCA 184/96 Appellant AND ACCIDENT REHABILITATION AND COMPENSATION INSURANCE CORPORATION a body corporate duly constituted under the provisions of the said Act Respondent AND MAUREEN O'HARA Claimant DECISION OF JUDGE M J BEATTIE ON THE PAPERS The appellant is the former employer of the claimant. In January 1993 the claimant sought cover under the Act under section 7 for what might be described as industrial asthma said to have been brought on by her exposure to chemical in her work place. 2 The Corporation duly carried out inquiries required of it for a gradual process claim and by its decision of 30 March 1994 it accepted the claim for cover. The appellant sought a review of that decision as the employer, and a review hearing took place on 16 November 1994. As a consequence of that hearing various inquiries were made by and on behalf of the Review Officer and it was not until 10 June 1996 that he delivered his decision confirming the Corporation's decision to grant cover. The appellant has now appealed to this Court against that decision and for the purposes of that appeal it sought leave to adduce further evidence both of the workplace environment and of expert medical opinion in relation to the likelihood of the claimant having suffered industrial asthma as a consequence of the workplace environment. That the record discloses that all such further evidence that was sought to be brought has been delivered to the respondent and to the claimant's solicitors and the result of that further evidence, although it has not yet been tested or considered by this Court, is that the respondent now accepts that the weight of evidence is against the finding of a gradual process injury under section 7 of the Act. In those circumstances the respondent supports the appellant in its appeal. Counsel for the claimant has now indicated to the Registry that the claimant does not wish to be further associated with the appeal and advises: "Accordingly we advise that the proceedings insofar as Ms O'Hara is associated may be discontinued". 3 Counsel for the appellant and respondent have now filed a joint memorandum which seeks that this Court make an order in effect allowing the appeal. As it is now on record that the claimant does not wish to take any further part in the appeal and in the light of the evidence which has been produced and by the consent of counsel for the appellant and the respondent this Court hereby directs that the decision of the Review Officer made on 10 June 1996 be revoked. No order for costs is sought. DATED at WELLINGTON this 25thday of may 1998 MJ Beattie District Court Judge O'Hara.doc(gm)