Stringer v Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Corporation
Leave to appeal to the High Court was granted because the dispute raises a question of law about the interpretation of section 54 and the applicable regulations, which should be resolved by the High Court.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [1996] NZACC 83
- Parties
- Appellant: Rachelle May Stringer; Respondent: Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Corporation
- Court
- District Court
- Jurisdiction
- New Zealand
- Judgment Date
- 16 September 1996
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal Under Section 97 of the Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Act 1992 / Application for Leave to Appeal to the High Court; Leave Granted
- Outcome
- Leave to appeal to the High Court granted.
- Legal Topics
- Independence Allowance, Backdating of Benefits, Interpretation of Section 54, Regulatory 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
Rachelle May Stringer
Appellant
Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Corporation
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Appeal Under Section 97 of the Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Act 1992 / Application for Leave to Appeal to the High Court; Leave Granted
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether an independence allowance can be backdated to 1 July 1992 (commencement of the Act) or is effective only from the date of assessment (25 March 1995)
- 2 Whether the correct interpretation of section 54 and the relevant regulations requires High Court determination
Ratio Decidendi
Leave to appeal to the High Court was granted because the dispute raises a question of law about the interpretation of section 54 and the applicable regulations, which should be resolved by the High Court.
Court Disposition
Leave to appeal to the High Court granted.
Orders
- Leave to appeal to the High Court granted.
- Costs reserved.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
IN THE DISTRICT COURT HELD AT WELLINGTON Decision No. 83 /96 UNDER The Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Act 1992 52 95 3036 AND IN THE MATTER of an appeal pursuant to section 97 of the Act BETWEEN RACHELLE MAY STRINGER of Tauranga Appellant (Appeal No. DCA 194/95) 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 a decision of this Court issued on 18 April 1996 under number 24/96. The issue before the Court was whether the appellant was entitled to backdate payment of an independence allowance to 1 July 1992 when the Act came into force or whether the effective date should have been the date of the assessment of the allowance which was 25 March 1995. 2 As the issue raises a question of law regarding the interpretation of section 54 and the appropriate regulations, it should be considered by the High Court. Accordingly, leave to appeal to the High Court is granted and the question of costs is reserved DATED at WELLINGTON this 16th day of September 1996 A W Middleton District Court Judge dca19495.doc (nr)