New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Abatement of compensation

Legal area

Court

2 May 2014

Minchinton v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2014] NZACC 99
Court

District Court

Holiday pay paid on termination constitutes earnings liable to abatement; contemporaneous documentation and case manager advice established claimant knew abatement was likely so he did not receive the payments in good faith under s 251(2)(a), and he failed to prove a relevant detrimental alteration of position under s 251(2)(b); accordingly the Corporation was entitled to recover the overpaid weekly compensation and the appeal was dismissed.
22 Nov 2013

T v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2013] NZACC 387
Court

District Court

The first lump sum of $13,876.92 was correctly characterised as a retiring allowance rather than wages in lieu of notice; a retiring allowance falls within the s11 exception to 'earnings' and therefore the payment should not have been abated against ACC weekly compensation. The reviewer’s and respondent’s decisions abating that payment are quashed and the respondent must recalculate entitlements accordingly.
24 Feb 2004

Courtney v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2004] NZACC 22
Court

District Court

The appellant retained the status of a potential earner from the date of the 1977 injury and subsequent periods of employment operated as abatement of benefits but did not break the chain of causation; therefore ACC's decision refusing reinstatement was incorrect and the appellant is entitled to have weekly compensation reinstated and calculated by the respondent under the relevant statutory provisions.
28 Apr 1995

Bernstone v Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Corporation

Citation

[1995] NZACC 39
Court

District Court

Because s47(2) excludes 'compensation for loss of earnings' and the appellant was receiving weekly compensation immediately before termination (thus had no earnings immediately before termination), the holiday pay paid on termination is not subject to the abatement provisions of s47.
20 Mar 1995

McPherson v Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Corporation

Citation

(1995) 1 BACR 111
Court

District Court

The Court found on the balance of probabilities that the employer's letters and conduct amounted to an interruption of employment, not a termination; the Corporation failed to prove the holiday payments were "payments made on the termination of employment" within s.47(2); therefore s.47 abatement did not apply and the Corporation's decision to abate compensation is revoked.

New Zealand Case Law

Minchinton v Accident Compensation Corporation

T v Accident Compensation Corporation

Courtney v Accident Compensation Corporation

Bernstone v Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Corporation

McPherson v Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Corporation