Mollgaard v Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Corporation
Leave to appeal was granted because the central issue involved the interpretation of regulatory language ('expenses actually incurred'), which presented a question of law, and the respondent did not oppose the application.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [1998] NZACC 65
- Parties
- Appellant: David Mollgaard; Respondent: Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Corporation
- Court
- District Court
- Jurisdiction
- New Zealand
- Judgment Date
- 7 April 1998
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal Under Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Act 1992 / Application for Leave to Appeal to the High Court
- Outcome
- Application for leave to appeal granted
- Legal Topics
- Meaning of Statutory Phrase 'expenses Actually Incurred', Regulation 17(b) Interpretation, Leave to Appeal
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
David Mollgaard
Appellant
Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Corporation
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Appeal Under Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Act 1992 / Application for Leave to Appeal to the High Court
Legal Issues
- 1 Meaning of the words 'expenses actually incurred' in regulation 17(b) of the Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance (Complex Personal Injury) Interim Regulations 1994
- 2 Whether the issue constitutes a question of law suitable for leave to appeal to the High Court
Ratio Decidendi
Leave to appeal was granted because the central issue involved the interpretation of regulatory language ('expenses actually incurred'), which presented a question of law, and the respondent did not oppose the application.
Court Disposition
Application for leave to appeal granted
Orders
- Leave to appeal to the High Court granted
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
IN THE DISTRICT COURT HELD AT WELLINGTON Decision No. 65 /98 UNDER The Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Act 1992 AND IN THE MATTER of an appeal pursuant to section 91 of the Act BETWEEN DAVID MOLLGAARD of Hamilton Appellant (Appeal No. DCA 43/97) AND ACCIDENT REHABILITATION AND COMPENSATION INSURANCE CORPORATION a body corporate duly constituted under the provisions of the said Act Respondent APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL TO THE HIGH COURT The appellant has applied for leave to appeal to the High Court against the decision of this Court issued on 11 August 1997 under number 172/97. The issue before the Court was the meaning of the words "expenses actually incurred" as they appear in regulation 17(b) of the Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance (Complex Personal Injury) Interim Regulations 1994. The appellant submits that the issue is a question of law and the application is not opposed by the respondent. Accordingly, the application for leave to appeal to the High Court is granted. DATED at WELLINGTON this 7th day of April 1998 fueunadubai A W Middleton District Court Judge dca4397.doc (nr)