15 Jun 2021
Applying the Supreme Court two-stage test the Court found the appellant posed a real but low risk of sexual offending; that risk was not of sufficient gravity to justify the significant and intrusive registration and reporting obligations given their limited relevance to internet-only offending; consequently the original registration order was in error and was quashed.
13 Dec 2019
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed because the Court of Appeal made no error of principle; Sealegs' grievances amounted to an allegation of misapplication of the law to the facts, which does not satisfy the statutory leave criteria under s74 (no general or public importance and no risk of miscarriage of justice).
14 May 2019
Leave to appeal to the High Court was granted by consent because the parties agreed the District Court judgment raised a seriously arguable question of law specifically whether Judge Walker erred by failing to apply Ellwood v Accident Compensation Corporation [2007] NZAR 205 in relation to suspension of entitlements.
10 Jul 2015
Costs claims against the District Court fail because the identified errors were mistakes of law or process made in good faith and do not meet the high threshold (perversity, oppression or bad faith) required to award costs against a judicial officer; the private prosecutor who abided the decision similarly is not ordered to pay costs; accordingly costs lie where they fall.
7 Oct 2009
The Supreme Court granted leave to appeal limited to the approved ground: whether the Court of Appeal correctly applied AMP Finance NZ Limited v Heaven, thereby authorizing consideration of that point on appeal.
10 Sept 2004
Because medical experts agreed there was no discrete antecedent physical injury and there was no evidence that the regional/chronic pain syndrome was the consequence or progression of such an injury, the condition did not qualify as a "personal injury" under the Act and the reviewer’s finding of compensable injury could not be sustained; accordingly the insurer’s decision declining cover was upheld.
22 Mar 2004
Leave to appeal was granted because the application raises bona fide and novel legal questions—specifically the applicability of Waitaki to ACC overpayments and the availability of change of position defences—that are not settled and are of public importance, warranting High Court determination.
12 Aug 2003
Section 128 is plain and prohibits the Corporation from paying for rehabilitation or treatment costs incurred outside New Zealand unless s129 or regulations permit; therefore the Corporation was correct to decline ongoing funding for the appellant's medication while she resided overseas and the appeal is dismissed.
7 Dec 2000
The 30 July 1999 letter was the operative decision under s136 to cease the appellant's back entitlements; the 7 September 1999 letter was at most declaratory regarding that earlier decision and did not constitute a new decision that would restart the three‑month review period, therefore the review application filed after the statutory period was invalid and the Review Officer correctly found no jurisdiction.