Edwards v Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Corporation
The appeal was dismissed because the appellant failed to prosecute it by not filing submissions or responding to Registrar directions, justifying dismissal for want of prosecution.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [1999] NZACC 131
- Parties
- Appellant: Tracey Leigh Edwards; Respondent: Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Corporation
- Court
- District Court
- Jurisdiction
- New Zealand
- Judgment Date
- 28 May 1999
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal Under Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Act 1992, S 91 / On the Papers; Dismissal for Want of Prosecution
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed for want of prosecution.
- Legal Topics
- Appeal Procedure, Want of Prosecution, Review Officer Decision
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Tracey Leigh Edwards
Appellant
Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Corporation
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Appeal Under Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Act 1992, S 91 / On the Papers; Dismissal for Want of Prosecution
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the appeal should be dismissed for want of prosecution
- 2 Whether failure to comply with Registrar's directions warrants dismissal
Ratio Decidendi
The appeal was dismissed because the appellant failed to prosecute it by not filing submissions or responding to Registrar directions, justifying dismissal for want of prosecution.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed for want of prosecution.
Orders
- The appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
IN THE DISTRICT COURT HELD AT WELLINGTON Decision No. 131 /99 UNDER The Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Act 1992 AND IN THE MATTER of an appeal pursuant to section 91 of the Act BETWEEN TRACEY LEIGH EDWARDS Appellant (Appeal No. DCA 295/98) AND ACCIDENT REHABILITATION AND COMPENSATION INSURANCE CORPORATION a body corporate duly constituted under the provisions of the said Act Respondent JUDGMENT OF JUDGE M J BEATTIE ON THE PAPERS On 27 July 1998 Ms Edwards gave notice of her intention to lodge an appeal against a decision of a Review Officer which was issued on 25 June 1998 On 27 August 1998 the Registrar wrote to Ms Edwards asking her to file her submissions within 21 days. Ms Edwards did not file her submissions or respond to the Registrar's letters dated 18 October, 3 November, 9 December 1998 and 29 January 1999. In his letter of 22 February 1999, the Registrar advised Ms Edwards that the appeal would be referred to the Court with a request that it be dismissed for want of prosecution should no response be received by her. 2 As Ms Edwards has failed to respond to the Registrar's correspondence or made any attempt to prosecute the appeal, I dismiss this appeal for want of prosecution. DATED at WELLINGTON this 28TH day of may 1999 Death M J Beattie District Court Judge dca295-98.doc (nr)