Norris v Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Corporation
The appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution because the appellant failed to file the amended Notice of Appeal as directed and failed to respond to the Registrar's correspondence, demonstrating an absence of prosecution.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [1997] NZACC 131
- Parties
- Appellant: William John Norris; Respondent: Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Corporation
- Court
- District Court
- Jurisdiction
- New Zealand
- Judgment Date
- 24 June 1997
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal Under the Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Act 1992 (s91) / Decision on the Papers; Dismissal for Want of Prosecution
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed for want of prosecution
- Legal Topics
- Appeal, Want of Prosecution, Procedural Compliance, Dismissal
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
William John Norris
Appellant
Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Corporation
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Appeal Under the Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Act 1992 (s91) / Decision on the Papers; Dismissal for Want of Prosecution
Legal Issues
- 1 Failure to file amended Notice of Appeal as directed
- 2 Failure to respond to Registrar's correspondence
- 3 Whether appeal should be dismissed for want of prosecution
Ratio Decidendi
The appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution because the appellant failed to file the amended Notice of Appeal as directed and failed to respond to the Registrar's correspondence, demonstrating an absence 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 /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 WILLIAM JOHN NORRIS Appellant (Appeal No. DCA 253/96) 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 August 1996, Mr Norris lodged an appeal against a decision of a Review Officer which was issued on 29 July 1996. On 15 October 1996 Mr Midlane informed the Registry that he had been instructed by Mr Norris. On 10 February 1997 the Registrar asked Mr Midlane to file an amended Notice of Appeal by 21 February 1997. On 25 February 1997 Mr Midlane informed the Registry that he was experiencing difficulty obtaining further instructions from his client. On 26 February 1997 the Registrar wrote to Mr Norris informing him that he should contact his counsel and file an amended Notice of Appeal before 26 March 1997. 2 As Mr Norris has failed to respond to the Registrar's correspondence or made any attempt to prosecute the appeal, I dismiss the appeal of want of prosecution. DATED at WELLINGTON this 24 "day of June 1997. A W Middleton District Court Judge dca25396.doc