Taranaki Healthcare v Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Corporation
Because a breach of natural justice was found requiring a new review hearing, it was appropriate to fix costs now for the appellant's filing of the appeal and submissions; any costs on a subsequent appeal can be determined later.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [1996] NZACC 153
- Parties
- Appellant: TARANAKI HEALTHCARE of New Plymouth; Respondent: ACCIDENT REHABILITATION AND COMPENSATION INSURANCE CORPORATION
- Court
- District Court
- Jurisdiction
- New Zealand
- Judgment Date
- 16 December 1996
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal Under the Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Act 1992 / Costs Determination on Papers Following Direction for a New Review Hearing
- Outcome
- Costs awarded to appellant
- Legal Topics
- Natural Justice, Costs, Review Hearing, Breach of Natural Justice
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
TARANAKI HEALTHCARE of New Plymouth
Appellant
ACCIDENT REHABILITATION AND COMPENSATION INSURANCE CORPORATION
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Appeal Under the Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Act 1992 / Costs Determination on Papers Following Direction for a New Review Hearing
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether costs should be fixed now or deferred until the appeal is finally heard
- 2 Whether appellant is entitled to costs for lodging the appeal and associated submissions
- 3 Whether there was a breach of natural justice requiring a new review hearing
Ratio Decidendi
Because a breach of natural justice was found requiring a new review hearing, it was appropriate to fix costs now for the appellant's filing of the appeal and submissions; any costs on a subsequent appeal can be determined later.
Court Disposition
Costs awarded to appellant
Orders
- Appellant awarded costs of $250 for filing the appeal and the subsequent submissions leading to the direction for a new review hearing
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
IN THE DISTRICT COURT HELD AT WELLINGTON Decision No. 153/96 UNDER The Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Act 1992 AND IN THE MATTER of an appeal pursuant to section 91 of the Act BETWEEN TARANAKI HEALTHCARE of New Plymouth Appellant (Appeal No. DCA 240/96) 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 11 October 1996, I issued a memorandum directing that the issues the subject of an appeal to the Court required to be the subject of another review hearing as there had been a breach of natural justice in that the present appellant had not been notified of the intention to hold the review hearing which subsequently led to the appeal filed in this Court. I issued the memorandum after considering submissions filed by counsel for the appellant. The appellant has now applied for costs in respect of the lodging of the appeal and its subsequent disposal by the Court. The respondent has submitted that the question of costs should be deferred until the appeal has been heard because, in the meantime, it has not been struck out or dismissed. The appellant submits that the result of the proposed review hearing may be that the appeal will not need to proceed. 2 I consider that it is appropriate that costs should be fixed now. If the matter subsequently goes to appeal, then the question of costs on appeal can be determined then. In relation to the filing of this appeal and the subsequent submissions which have led to my decision that a new review hearing is required, the appellant is awarded costs of $250. DATED at WELLINGTON this 16 day of Derember A W Middleton District Court Judge dc240-96.doc (nr)