Hart v Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Corporation
The appeal was dismissed because the appellant failed to file required submissions, did not respond to multiple Registrar requests, and the notices of hearing were returned, demonstrating failure to prosecute the appeal.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [1997] NZACC 132
- Parties
- Appellant: K Hart; Respondent: Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Corporation
- Court
- District Court
- Jurisdiction
- New Zealand
- Judgment Date
- 30 June 1997
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal Pursuant to Section 91 of the Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Act 1992 / Dismissed for Want of Prosecution on the Papers
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed for want of prosecution
- Legal Topics
- Appeal, Want of Prosecution, Service of Process
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
K Hart
Appellant
Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Corporation
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Appeal Pursuant to Section 91 of the Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Act 1992 / Dismissed for Want of Prosecution on the Papers
Legal Issues
- 1 Failure to prosecute appeal by not filing submissions
- 2 Failure to respond to Registrar's correspondence
- 3 Notices returned to sender hindering contact
Ratio Decidendi
The appeal was dismissed because the appellant failed to file required submissions, did not respond to multiple Registrar requests, and the notices of hearing were returned, demonstrating failure to prosecute the appeal.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed for want of prosecution
Orders
- Appeal dismissed for want of prosecution
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
IN THE DISTRICT COURT HELD AT WELLINGTON Decision No. 132 /97 UNDER The Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Act 1992 AND IN THE MATTER of an appeal pursuant to section 91 of the Act BETWEEN K HART of Invercargill Appellant (Appeal No. DCA 054/96) AND ACCIDENT REHABILITATION AND COMPENSATION INSURANCE CORPORATION a body corporate duly constituted under the provisions of the said Act Respondent DECISION OF JUDGE A W MIDDLETON ON THE PAPERS On 26 February 1996, by notice dated 24 February 1996 Miss Hart appealed against the decision of a Review Officer which issued on 8 February 1996. On 3 April 1996 the Registrar requested Miss Hart to file her submissions in support of the appeal within 21 days. A further letter requesting submissions was sent on 6 May 1997. In addition, the appellant was advised the appeal would be set down for hearing during the week of 16 - 20 June 1997. This letter was returned to the Registry. Another letter was sent to the appellant at an Auckland address requesting her to file submissions within seven days. This letter was also returned. 2 As Miss Hart has failed to respond to the Registrar's correspondence or make any attempt to prosecute the appeal I dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. DATED at WELLINGTON this 30th day of June 1997 A W Middleton District Court Judge Hart.doc(nI)