New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Judicial review of discretionary decisions

Legal area

Court

27 Jan 2017

Whiting v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2017] NZACC 2
Court

District Court

Because the vocational independence process had lawfully commenced and the VIOA concluded the requested courses were not necessary to render the identified work types occupationally suitable, the Corporation properly exercised its discretion under the Act to decline further vocational rehabilitation; once vocational independence is found claimant ceases to be entitled to weekly compensation and to vocational rehabilitation.
30 Sept 2016

Gilbert v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2016] NZACC 270
Court

District Court

The Court allowed both appeals and set aside ACC's decisions because the assessor reports and resulting decisions were legally flawed: Elderkamp's backdated assessment was fundamentally flawed for failing to recognise contemporaneous determinations, to consider the parents' evidence and to explain discrepancies in hours, rendering the 12 September 2008 decision invalid; Gladwin's (and Hessell's) SNAs erred in law by conflating identification of injury-related needs with decisions about who should provide them, improperly attributing significant injury-related supervision and night care to ord…
29 Apr 2016

Gregory v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2016] NZACC 118
Court

District Court

Assessors in the 2003 and 2005 assessments erred in law by conflating the appellant's identified need for overnight supervision with an assumption that family/flatmates would supply that supervision, thereby failing to perform the required two-stage analysis (identifying needs under s84 and leaving ACC to decide provision/contribution under s81 and cl14). The attendant care assessments were therefore flawed and the ACC decisions based on them must be set aside to the extent they relate to sleepover attendant care; ACC must reconsider whether to provide or contribute, including retrospective c…
8 Jun 2015

McCloud v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2015] NZACC 137
Court

District Court

A high wooden boundary fence that enables the claimant to safely use and enjoy his backyard is a modification to the home and, on the evidence, meets the s81(4) requirements (assessment, rehabilitation outcome, necessity and appropriateness, type normally provided as a building modification). The absence of the fence from the individual rehabilitation plan did not preclude updating the plan once a proper assessment established need. ACC's refusal failed to take into account relevant considerations and relied on irrelevant ones, rendering the decision legally wrong; therefore the ACC and revie…
27 Nov 2014

Stokes v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2014] NZACC 315
Court

District Court

The Court held that a small percentage (5%) of occupationally attributable hearing loss can nonetheless be a direct consequence of a covered injury; percentage alone does not preclude entitlement and may instead inform the extent of ACC's contribution; ACC's decision declining provision was erroneous and must be reconsidered under Schedule 1 cl13.
11 Dec 2013

CAPITAL HOSPITALITY HOLDINGS LTD (IN LIQUIDATION) v PANDEY ORS [2013] NZHC 3323

Citation

(2013) 21 PRNZ 676
Court

High Court

The review is dismissed; the Associate Judge's costs order is upheld because the High Court's objective deemed costs regime permits awards without production of evidence of actual in‑house counsel salary and overheads, and representation by in‑house counsel does not preclude a costs award on a 2B basis; any irrelevant consideration identified did not render the decision wrong on review.
30 Oct 2013

Sharpe v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2013] NZACC 360
Court

District Court

Court held ACC erred in law by concluding it had no jurisdiction to contribute to transport running costs in all circumstances; ACC must assess reasonableness of contributions in light of the claimant's particular circumstances. The attendant care reduction to 164 hours was a permissible exercise of discretion and was upheld.
21 Feb 2011

DOUGLAS JOHN WILLIAMSON V TV WORKS LIMITED BROADCASTING AS TV3 HC WN CIV 2010-485-2120

Citation

openlaw-123007a6_5ac3_4570_8ca4_0ac6fbe19f9f.pdf
Court

High Court

Leave to extend time was refused because the notice of appeal was not brought within the one month statutory period, the appellant's excuse did not overcome that defect and, critically, the proposed appeal disclosed little or no prospect of success as the BSA's findings were rational, supported by evidence and not shown to be reviewably erroneous; accordingly the interests of justice did not require granting extension.
18 Dec 2008

TRENEARY V TRENEARY AND ORS HC NWP CIV 2008-443-000386

Citation

openlaw-8ed75823_499a_47cd_8e0b_a85a6b39a2d2.pdf
Court

High Court

The High Court held the Family Court erred by conflating property management concerns with the separate statutory inquiry into welfare guardianship under s12, by applying findings about past financial mismanagement as an (irrelevant) determinant of suitability for welfare guardianship and by failing to adequately ascertain and consider the subject's wishes and the evidential basis for welfare findings; therefore the appointment must be remitted for fresh consideration and the interim appointments should continue.
2 Feb 2001

Invercargill Licensing Trust v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2001] NZACC 17
Court

District Court

On the medical factual findings adopted (notably the opinions of Dr Fountain and Dr Anderson) the claimant's disabling condition was substantively caused by a pre-existing degenerative cervical condition and complications from surgery rather than by an acute workplace strain; therefore the payments in 1993/1994 were not qualifying payments attributable to the appellant and the respondent's decision to include those costs was plainly wrong and is quashed.