ACCforum: Negligence Claim Struck Out - ACCforum

Jump to content

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Negligence Claim Struck Out The King can do no wrong

#1 User is offline   MG 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 503
  • Joined: 05-February 04

Posted 28 May 2015 - 02:42 PM

In the attached decision, Associate Judge Christiansen struck out a claim against ACC involving negligence and ordered the plaintiff to pay ACC's costs, after determining that section 317 of the Accident Compensation Act 2001 barred the claim. IMHO, this case is useful for its analysis of the extent of s317 and how far the Courts are willing to immunise ACC from the adverse consequences of its behaviour. ACC afficionados may remember Associate Judge Christiansen at the centre of a rather messy civil dispute some years ago, in which he was accused of sexually abusing a clerical worker of the Justice Department while hearing cases away from home. Readers will be pleased to know that, not only was Associate Judge Christiansen cleared of the allegations, he was also promoted from the District Court to the High COurt, although only as an Associate Judge, not a full one. Any speculation as to whether Associate Judge Christiansen's alleged misconduct was either so heinous to disqualify him from full promotion, or whether it was insufficiently heinous to qualify him for it, is thoroughly mischievous and must be firmly eschewed. In any event, the learned Associate Judge is clearly performing the requirements of his office by strking out claims by people alleging they were harmed by ACC's famously high standards of claims management.

Attached File(s)


1

#2 User is offline   BLURB 

  • accforum.nz
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 5774
  • Joined: 22-July 06
  • LocationCambridge

Posted 28 May 2015 - 03:10 PM

Judge Jock: Leaky Emails, Saucy Goings-On, Can Jimbo Pull It Off

http://www.nbr.co.nz...-it-ja-p-141417

Google search: Judge Christiansen

https://www.google.c...sm=122&ie=UTF-8
1

#3 User is offline   batman 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 80
  • Joined: 17-September 05

Posted 29 May 2015 - 01:07 PM

Yes but did you see where Ex minister jenny shipley among mainzeal directors facing legal action, claim alleged breach of director's duties ,and look how it is been funded. So what about the acc board member's .Well the court may have to look at over 20 year's worth of board member's in my case . cheer's
1

#4 User is offline   Huggy 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1219
  • Joined: 18-October 05

Posted 29 May 2015 - 01:12 PM

If there is no remedy in the ACC jurisdiction surely there must be a remedy elsewhere.........

Below is the article Batman is referring too.


http://www.stuff.co....ng-legal-action
1

#5 User is offline   MINI 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 7810
  • Joined: 09-October 07

Posted 30 May 2015 - 12:00 PM

View PostHuggy, on 29 May 2015 - 01:12 PM, said:

If there is no remedy in the ACC jurisdiction surely there must be a remedy elsewhere.........

Below is the article Batman is referring too.


http://www.stuff.co....ng-legal-action


Thanks Huggy
See mainzeal related companies were of much concern to BDO and the amount of transfers that had taken place.

Sounds like Mainzeal followed one of our own Forum members, with an unnecessary group of Ltd companies parked at their feet.

Didn't help did it................they been sprung moving funds around.....not arm length transactions eh?? Therefore near to fraudulent maybe?? Interesting reading.

Mini
0

#6 User is offline   Rosey 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1808
  • Joined: 25-December 09
  • LocationHamilton

Posted 03 June 2015 - 12:23 AM

Thank you for keeping us informed MG.

View PostMG, on 28 May 2015 - 02:42 PM, said:

In the attached decision, Associate Judge Christiansen struck out a claim against ACC involving negligence and ordered the plaintiff to pay ACC's costs, after determining that section 317 of the Accident Compensation Act 2001 barred the claim. IMHO, this case is useful for its analysis of the extent of s317 and how far the Courts are willing to immunise ACC from the adverse consequences of its behaviour. ACC afficionados may remember Associate Judge Christiansen at the centre of a rather messy civil dispute some years ago, in which he was accused of sexually abusing a clerical worker of the Justice Department while hearing cases away from home. Readers will be pleased to know that, not only was Associate Judge Christiansen cleared of the allegations, he was also promoted from the District Court to the High COurt, although only as an Associate Judge, not a full one. Any speculation as to whether Associate Judge Christiansen's alleged misconduct was either so heinous to disqualify him from full promotion, or whether it was insufficiently heinous to qualify him for it, is thoroughly mischievous and must be firmly eschewed. In any event, the learned Associate Judge is clearly performing the requirements of his office by strking out claims by people alleging they were harmed by ACC's famously high standards of claims management.

0

Share this topic:


Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users