New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Topic

Judicial discretion on leave

Legal area

Court

16 May 2012

Marshall v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2012] NZACC 165
Court

District Court

Leave to appeal was refused because no seriously arguable question of law was identified: the Corporation's letter did not fall within the statutory definition of reviewable 'decision' in s6; the impairment assessment was supported by appointed medical opinion and peer review with no competing expert evidence to raise a legal issue; and hedge/tree trimming did not fall within 'domestic activities' as interpreted in authority, while the appellant failed to properly present a legal question and the Court would refuse leave as a discretionary allocation of resources.
22 Jul 2010

Chambers v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2010] NZACC 106
Court

District Court

Leave to appeal was refused because the applicant raised primarily factual disputes and not a serious and arguable question of law; earlier primary, review and appellate decisions had determined the date of incapacity (including consideration of s.7(5) of the 1992 Act) such that relitigation was barred by estoppel, there was no fresh persuasive evidence warranting review, and the court declined to exercise its discretion to grant leave given delay and lack of legal merit.