Karaitiana v Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Corporation
Leave to appeal to the High Court was granted because the case raised a clear question of law concerning the interpretation of Regulation 3(1) of the Accident Compensation (Specialists Costs) Regulations (No. 2) 1990 as applied to whether the injection procedure is payable.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [1997] NZACC 35
- Parties
- Appellant: JOHN KARAITIANA; Respondent: ACCIDENT REHABILITATION AND COMPENSATION INSURANCE CORPORATION
- Court
- District Court
- Jurisdiction
- New Zealand
- Judgment Date
- 11 March 1997
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal Under Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Act 1992 Section 97 / Application for Leave to Appeal to the High Court
- Outcome
- Leave to appeal to the High Court granted.
- Legal Topics
- Interpretation of Regulations, Coverage of Medical Treatment Under ACC, Reproductive Treatment Funding
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
JOHN KARAITIANA
Appellant
ACCIDENT REHABILITATION AND COMPENSATION INSURANCE CORPORATION
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Appeal Under Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Act 1992 Section 97 / Application for Leave to Appeal to the High Court
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether injection of the appellant's sperm into a female recipient is treatment payable under Regulation 3(1) of the Accident Compensation (Specialists Costs) Regulations (No. 2) 1990
- 2 Whether the respondent is liable to pay the cost of the injection
- 3 Whether there is a question of law sufficient to grant leave to appeal to the High Court
Ratio Decidendi
Leave to appeal to the High Court was granted because the case raised a clear question of law concerning the interpretation of Regulation 3(1) of the Accident Compensation (Specialists Costs) Regulations (No. 2) 1990 as applied to whether the injection procedure is payable.
Court Disposition
Leave to appeal to the High Court granted.
Orders
- Leave to appeal to the High Court granted.
- Question of costs reserved.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
IN THE DISTRICT COURT HELD AT WELLINGTON Decision No. 35 / 97 UNDER The Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Act 1992 AND IN THE MATTER of an appeal pursuant to section 97 of the Act BETWEEN JOHN KARAITIANA of Ruatoki Appellant (Appeal No. DCA 243/ 95) 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 respondent has applied for leave to appeal to the High Court against the decision of this Court issued on 18 April 1996 under No. 25/96. The Court had held that the respondent was not able to pay the cost of an operation injecting the appellant's sperm into a female recipient for the purpose of reproduction. The respondent had accepted that in the circumstances it would pay the cost of removing the sperm from the appellant, but refused the cost of injecting it into the female recipient. The issue before the Court was whether the treatment is one which comes within the provisions of Regulation 3(1) of the Accident Compensation (Specialists Costs) Regulations (No. 2) 1990. I consider that there is clearly an issue of law in the interpretation of the relevant regulations insofar as they applied in this case and accordingly leave to appeal to the High Court is granted. 2 The question of costs is reserved. DATED at WELLINGTON this (1 th day of Mouch 1997 Auermadula A W Middleton District Court Judge de24395.doc(rd)