Search Results

1. Regulatory Impact Statement increasing maximum claims level in disputes tribunals [pdf, 506 KB]

   ...considered all of the possible maximum claims levels that could be set. Assessing at which point people would require better protections (such as better appeal rights) is difficult, and more time and resource would be needed to survey potential applicants to determine when they would make this judgment. Analysis of whether or not civil legal aid eligibility should be changed is not feasible because the Government has already made final decisions in this area. The Ministry has not...

2. Hetherington v Accident Compensation Corporation Claims Process [2023] NZACC 37 [pdf, 146 KB]

   ...2001 (“the Act”)] Introduction [1] This appeal relates to an appeal lodged by Mr Hetherington on 19 February 2020. The appeal is against the decision of a Reviewer dated 7 February 2020. The Reviewer dismissed Mr Hetherington’s review applications, for want of jurisdiction. Background [2] On 28 November 1979 Mr Hetherington injured his back. Following a review application in 1981, on 31 May 1982, a Reviewer held that Mr Hetherington suffered personal injury by accident...

3. Brown v Accident Compensation Corporation (Claims Process) [2023] NZACC 213 [pdf, 170 KB]

   ...Held at: Rotorua/Rotorua-Nui-a-Kahumatamomoe Appearances: K Koloni for the Appellant F Becroft for the Accident Compensation Corporation (“the Corporation”) Judgment: 19 December 2023 RESERVED JUDGMENT OF JUDGE P R SPILLER [Claims process – s 54, Accident Compensation Act 2001 (“the Act”)] Introduction [1] This is an appeal from the decision of a Reviewer dated 20 April 2021. The Reviewer dismissed an application for review of the Corporation’s decisi...

4. Alves v Accident Compensation Corporation (Claims Process) [2023 NZACC 197] [pdf, 162 KB]

   ...Wellington/Whanganui-a-tara by AVL Appearances: The Appellant is self-represented C Hlavac and M Gall for the Accident Compensation Corporation (“the Corporation”) Judgment: 5 December 2023 RESERVED JUDGMENT OF JUDGE P R SPILLER [Claims process, ss 149(3) and 317, Accident Compensation Act 2001 (“the Act”)] Introduction [1] This is an appeal from the decision of a Reviewer dated 24 May 2023. The Reviewer dismissed an application for review on the basis of...

5. Pouakani Claims Trust v Tuaropaki A Trust - Pouakani Claims Trust (2006) 83 Taupo MB 155 (83 TPO 155) [pdf, 663 KB]

   ...from this Court for mandate per section 30 of Te Ture Whenua Maori Act 1993 in the context of negotiations concerning the Waikato River and the Pouakani tribes. The respondents, Raukawa Trust Board, Tuaropaki A Trust and Ngati Whaita Trust all claimed to be affected by the application, which they opposed, and sought to be heard. Following a series of judicial conferences and other interlocutory steps, on the eve of commencement of the hearing Mr Paki initially sought an adjournment...

6. BORA Maungaharuru-Tangitū Hapū Claims Settlement Bill [pdf, 286 KB]

   Maungaharuru-Tangitū Hapū Claims Settlement Bill 24 June 2013 Attorney-General Maungaharuru-Tangitū Hapū Claims Settlement Bill (PCO16511/Version 3.10): Consistency with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 Our Ref: ATT395/197 1. I have considered the above Bill for consistency with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 (the Bill of Rights Act). I advise that the Bill appears to be consistent with the Bill of Rights Act. 2. The Bill effects a final settlemen...

7. Apostolakis No. 2 (Rejection of Statement of Claim) [2017] NZHRRT 33 [pdf, 222 KB]

   ...Member Mr BK Neeson JP, Member REPRESENTATION: Mrs K Apostolakis in person The intended first, second and third defendants were not heard DATE OF DECISION: 7 September 2017 DECISION OF TRIBUNAL THAT INTENDED STATEMENT OF CLAIM NOT BE ACCEPTED FOR FILING 1 Introduction [1] On 17 July 2017 Mrs Apostolakis presented for filing in the office of the Tribunal a statement of claim dated 13 July 2017. The claim is made under the Privacy Act 1993. [2] The...

8. Re Apostolakis (Rejection of Statement of Claim) [2016] NZHRRT 35 [pdf, 68 KB]

   ...does not affect a defendant’s statutory right under s 115 of the Act to apply to have proceedings, once filed, dismissed on the grounds they are trivial, frivolous, or vexatious or not brought in good faith. Intending plaintiff must use correct form [5] The forms approved by the Tribunal under the Human Rights Review Tribunal Regulations 2002, reg 5 for the commencement of proceedings, are published on the Tribunal’s website. There are three forms in all, reflecting the Tribunal’...

9. Re Dunstan (Rejection of Statement of Claim) [2023] NZHRRT 34 [pdf, 184 KB]

   ...DUNSTAN AT WELLINGTON BEFORE: Ms Sarah Eyre, Chairperson REPRESENTATION: Ms Dunstan, in person The intended defendant was not heard DATE OF DECISION: 13 October 2023 DECISION OF TRIBUNAL THAT INTENDED STATEMENT OF CLAIM NOT BE ACCEPTED FOR FILING1 [1] On 19 April 2023, Ms Dunstan presented for filing in the Tribunal a statement of claim (on the official claim form) purportedly filed under s 98 of the Privacy Act 2020 (the Act). [2] The form on...

10. Re Tai Rakena (Rejection of Statement of Claim) [2017] NZHRRT 27 [pdf, 140 KB]

    ...issued by the Commissioner on 21 December 2016 in respect of file reference C/28386. In this Certificate the Commissioner certifies he conducted an investigation into the question whether Corrections provided Mr Tai Rakena with all the information he requested on certain PC.01 forms, being PC.01 4001501; PC.01 401032 and PC.01 401143. In these proceedings a case management teleconference was held on 12 May 2017 but the timetable then made will not expire until 1 September 2017. Thereaf...