Larkin v Accident Compensation Corporation (Leave to Appeal)

IN THE DISTRICT COURT AT WELLINGTON [2019] NZACC 12 ACR 31/13 ACR 311/17 UNDER THE ACCIDENT COMPENSATION ACT 2001 IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 162 OF THE ACT FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL TO THE HIGH COURT ON A QUESTION OF LAW BETWEEN PENELOPE HOARE (AS LITIGATION GUARDIAN OF KURTIS LARKIN) Applicant AND ACCIDENT COMPENSATION CORPORATION Respondent Hearing: On the Papers at Auckland Judgment: 12 February 2019 DECISION OF JUDGE G M HARRISON []] The applicant seeks leave to appeal to the High Court on a question of law pursuant to s 162 of the Act, from the decision of Her Honour Judge JH Walker of 8 November 2018. 2] By minute of 5 December 2018 Judge Christiansen directed the filing of submissions by specified dates following which a decision on the application for leave would be given on the papers. The parties have now filed a joint memorandum of 29 January 2019 in which it is agreed that there is a question of law arising from the decision of Judge Walker which should be referred to the High Court for resolution. 2 [3] The question of law concerns the interpretation of sections of the statute which clearly raises a question of law. [4] The parties have not been able to agree on the precise wording of the question for reference to the High Court. Indeed, in my experience any question of law identified when leave is granted to appeal is often modified by the High Court following the hearing of submissions. [5] Bearing in mind that possibility, I grant leave to the applicant to appeal to the High Court on the following question of law: Do sections 374 and 376 of the Accident Compensation Act 2001 confer any power on the respondent to compensate the applicant for constant personal attention/attendant care provided over the period 1 July 1993-31 March 20027 [6] Leave granted accordingly. No issue as to costs arises. District Court Judge