New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Special benefit

Legal area

Court

12 Jul 2019

COOK v THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE MINISTRY OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT [2019] NZHC 1604

Citation

[2019] NZHC 1604
Court

High Court

The application for an extension of time was dismissed because there was no arguable question of law: prior determinations conclusively resolved the special benefit issue and, on the statutory test for temporary additional support, the applicant had a calculated surplus and therefore no entitlement; accordingly the appeal had no real prospect of success and extension of time was refused.
5 May 2016

LAWSON v CHIEF EXECUTIVE, MINISTRY OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT [2016] NZHC 910

Citation

[2016] NZHC 910
Court

High Court

Bonus Bonds were correctly treated as unencumbered cash assets for assessing entitlement; the Authority lawfully applied an ordinary meaning of 'emergency' alongside cl12.2 factors; the Training Incentive Allowance refusal stands despite an acknowledged misapplied restriction because the lawful considerations and evidence justify the same outcome; storage fees for off-site furniture are not accommodation costs under s61E/s61EA; the Authority's factual assessments and discretionary conclusions were not legally erroneous in ways that would change outcomes; Authority should apply rigour in frami…
28 Apr 2015

COOK v THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE MINISTRY OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT [2015] NZHC 850

Citation

[2015] NZHC 850
Court

High Court

The Appeal Authority must independently assess material issues on rehearing; because the Authority's decision did not show it had independently assessed the appellant's claimed special dietary requirements against the evidence (including the Otago Food Cost Survey) the matter was remitted for reconsideration on that specific issue; the Authority's practice of sitting with the Deputy Chairperson and one other member was held lawful under the Act or, alternatively, any defect was immaterial.
10 Dec 2014

PRASAD v THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE MINISTRY OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT [2014] NZHC 3156

Citation

[2014] NZHC 3156
Court

High Court

The Authority erred in law by excluding the $50 without first determining whether the expense fell within the specific categories of allowable costs in cl 2.1 of the Ministerial Direction; that error warranted answering the stated question in the affirmative and no rehearing was required given the trivial amount and conceded outcome.
23 Oct 2006

DAVID SMITH AND JEAN CHAN V CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF WORK AND INCOME NEW ZEALAND CA CA181/05

Citation

openlaw-b398edb2_c196_43bf_8208_dd2a54f87b4b.pdf
Court

Court of Appeal

The Court held that 'special circumstances' in the definition of 'allowable costs' means circumstances that are unusual or outside the norm; consequently the costs listed in paragraphs (a)–(h) are included as allowable costs but other costs qualify only if they arise from such unusual circumstances, a construction that prevents overlap with standard costs and avoids double-counting.

New Zealand Case Law

COOK v THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE MINISTRY OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT [2019] NZHC 1604

LAWSON v CHIEF EXECUTIVE, MINISTRY OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT [2016] NZHC 910

COOK v THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE MINISTRY OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT [2015] NZHC 850

PRASAD v THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE MINISTRY OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT [2014] NZHC 3156

DAVID SMITH AND JEAN CHAN V CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF WORK AND INCOME NEW ZEALAND CA CA181/05