Posted 08 September 2009 - 04:12 PM
I took note also MG that he also thinks that he has been a worker.
Street Just a couple of follow-up things. Mr Judge; welcome, also, to the position.
You referred to the principles of the Woodhouse scheme and the repetitive
phrase we’ve heard recently, about 24/7, no fault cover. In fact, there are
five principles in the Woodhouse report that underpin the ACC scheme,
and it began, obviously, as a worker compensation scheme and broadened
from there to be something unique to New Zealand. In your view, is there a
place on the board for a worker representative?
Judge If I was going to answer that, I’d answer that more broadly, and I’d answer
in the following: this is a large and complex financial institution, and in my
view it is essential that the board comprises people who have the skills and
knowledge to govern such an institution. That requires high-level financial
skills; high-level investment skills; preferably—which we don’t yet have
upon the board—someone who has managed an exceptionally large entity
of the same nature, preferably internationally; and actuarial skills. I don’t
believe that it is necessary that a representative, particularly from any group
of what you might call levy-payers or claimants, if you take it on is likely—
or, actually, hopefully it might be less likely—to be a claimant under the
motor vehicle scheme as many other people, as are all the people there. I
think one does want a multiplicity of views and experiences around the
Street And if there are no worker representatives present, is there a gap, then, in
your view of the advice?
Judge I’m not sure why you would think I wasn’t a worker.
Woodhouse In terms of experience, though, on the board, is it not correct that one of
the newly appointed directors, Rob Campbell, is very experienced in union
representation? I mean, is it true that he has that experience?
2007/08 FINANCIAL REVIEW – ACCIDENT COMPENSATION CORPORATION
Judge It is. His appointment to the board is finally an issue for the Minister, not
for me. I mean, clearly I expressed the view that I wanted to have some
In regard to your wish to attend Polytech, which you advise you could only do with financial assistance; we regret that we are unable to assist in your situation as if you wish to improve your employment possibilities beyond pre-accident level, this must be considered your personal choice and responsibility. Case manager Mr D. J. Lamond 26 May 1988
"If the right to be heard is to be a real right which is worth anything, it must carry with it a right in the accused man to know the case which is made against him. He must know what evidence has been given and what statements have been made affecting him and then he must be given a fair opportunity to correct or contradict them. .... It follows, of course that the judge or whoever has to adjudicate must not hear evidence or receive representations from one side behind the back of others.The court will not require whether the evidence or representations did work to his prejudice. Sufficient that they might do so. The court will not go into the likelihood ofprejudice. The risk of it is enough."Lord Denning  A.C. at page 337.
In Escoigne Properties Ltd v Inland Revenue Commissioners  AC 549 Lord Denning said at pp 566:
"Thus one of the best ways, I find, ofunderstanding a statute is to take some specific which, by common consent, are intended to be covered by it. I can say at once: "Yes, that is the sort ofthing Parliament intended to "cover". The reason is not far to seek. When the draftsman is drawing the Act, he has in mind particular instances which he wishes to cover. He frames aformula which he hopes will embrace them all with precision. But the formula is as unintelligible as a mathematical formula to anyone except experts: and even then they have to know what the symbols mean. To make it intelligible, you must know the sort of thing that Parliament had in mind. So you have resort to particular instances to gather the meaning. "