New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

New Zealand Case Law

Judicial review and remittal

  • 27 Apr 2010

    T E v Accident Compensation Corporation

    Citation
    [2010] NZACC 64
    Court
    District Court

    The District Court allowed the appeal because the Corporation's decision to apply significant apportionment and a 20% FWPI was not soundly based: critical factual assumptions about maternal psychiatric history, alcoholism and attachment dysfunction were unreliable or unsupported, and those assumptions materially affected apportionment and causal conclusions. The correct remedy is to quash the review decision and require the Corporation to obtain a fresh primary assessment under clause 59 of Schedule 1, providing the assessor with the full documentation and this judgment.

    • Impairment assessment
    • Apportionment
    • Causation of mental injury
    • Medical expert evidence
    • Judicial review and remittal

  • 14 Jul 1997

    Sweeney v Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Corporation

    Citation
    [1997] NZACC 146
    Court
    District Court

    The appeal is allowed because the Corporation failed to provide adequate reasons for refusing to approve or arrange for an overseas assessor in Sydney; that failure made the decision unsupportable and the matter is remitted to the Review Officer to determine whether the Corporation has provided sufficient justification and acted reasonably after receiving further evidence or submissions.

    • Independence allowance assessment
    • Assessment overseas
    • Section 88 interpretation
    • Reasonableness of administrative decision
    • Judicial review and remittal