New Zealand Law/Tort
{{Template:law}} {{Template:study guide}} {{Template:non-formal education}} {{Template:0%done}} |
Accident Compensation
editStatutes
editInjury Prevention Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2001
editAccident Compensation Act 1972
editAccident Compensation Act 1982
editAccident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Act 1992
editAccident Insurance Act 1998
editAccident Insurance Amendment Act 2000
editCases
editG v Auckland Hospital Board [1976] 1 NZLR 638
editWalbutton v ACC
edit- Held
- An accident is an event that is not intended by the person who suffers the misfortune.
Donselaar v Donselaar
editWillis v AG
editACC v Mitchell
edit- Held
- There is no need to show that an accident is caused by some external force. (Reversed by s3(a) 1992 Act)
ACC v F
edit- Facts
- Husband sued for depression brought on by wife's injury.
- Held
- While the husband's depression was an unlooked for mishap, the husband’s injury was not the relevant accident and mental injury must accompany physical injury.
ACC v E
editFacts: E was required by her workplace to undergo a management course by her employer and subsequently suffered suffered mental breakdown.
Held: E was initially turned down for cover under the ACC scheme because it was thought that the scheme only covered mental injury which was accompanied by a physical injury. Court of Appeal overturned the decision, deciding "physical and mental" was to be interpreted generously, to be applied as "physical or mental." This indicates the courts desire to interpret ACC legislation with wide breadth.
QLDC v Palmer
editMcGrory v Ansett NZ
editHarrild v Director of Proceedings
editSivasubramanium v Yarrall
editJordan v ACC
editACC v Booth
editACC v Auckland Health Board
editMacDonald v ACC (1985) 5 NZAR 276
editGreen v Matheson
editPolansky v ACC
editChilds v Hillock
editBrownlie v Good Health Wanganui (2005) CA
edit- Held
- Non-treatment is as much medical misadventure as negligent treatment
meow
A v Bottril [2003] 2 NZLR 721 (PC)
edit- see A v Bottril
McDermott v Wallace
editArticles
edit- Margaret McGregor Vennell "Accident Compensation" [1992] NZ Recent LR 1
- Manning [1992] NZ Recent LR 10
- Geoff McLay "Nervous Shock, Tort and Accident Compensation: Tort regained?" (1999) 30 VUWLR 197
- Manning "Daniels v Thompson: Double Punishment or Double Trouble?" [1998] New Zealand L Rev 721
- Richard Gaskins "Recalling the Future of ACC" [2000] VUWLR 17
- Stephen Todd "Exemplary Damages" (1998) 18 NZULR 145
- Ailsa Duffy "Common Law Response to the Accident Compensation Scheme" [2003] VUWLR 21
Negligence
editCases
editDuty of Care
edit- Anns v Merton LBC
- South Pacific v NZ Security
- Spring v Guardian Assocs
- Midland Metals v ChCh Press
- Rolls Royce v CHH
Auditors - Negligent Misstatement
edit- Scott Group v McFarlane
- Caparo v Dickman
- Boyd Knight v Purdue
Auditors - Other
edit- Price Waterhouse v Kwan
- Deloitte Haskins & Sells v National Mutual Life
- Wellington District Law Soc v PW
Council liability
edit- Anns v Merton LBC
- Bowen v Paramount Builders
- Brown v Heathcote CC
- Murphy v Brentwood DC
- Invercargill CC v Hamlin
- Three Meade St v Rotorua DC
Cases v Govt #1
edit- X v Bedforshire CC (1995)
- AG v Prince (1998)
- Barrett v Enfield LBC (1999)
- W v Essex CC (2000)
- B v Attorney-General (2004) 3 NZLR 145 (PC)
Cases v Govt #2
edit- A-G v Carter (2003)
- A-G v Body Corporate (2005)
- Tai Hobson v A-G (2006)
Nervous Shock
edit- Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire
- Van Soest v Residentical Health Mgt Unit
- W v Essex CC
Tort v Contractual Remedies
edit- Henderson v Merrett Syndicates
- Turton v Kuslake
- Rolls Royce NZ v CH
Limitation Period
edit- Invercargill CC v Hamlin
Nuisance
editPrivate Nuisance
editA-G v Geothermal Produce [1987] 2 NZLR 348
editBNZ v Greenwood [1984] 1 NZLR 525
editFrench v Auckland City Council [1974] 1 NZLR 340
editHunter v Canary Wharf [1997] AC 655
editPublic Nuisance
editRylands v Fletcher Nuisance
editRylands v Fletcher [1866] LR 1 Ex 265
editRickards v Lothian [1913] AC 263
edit- Facts
- An unknown person intentionally blocked a drain on the defendant's property causing water to overflow and damage the plaintiff's stock.
- Held:
1. An exception to Rylands & Fletcher liability - a person is not responsible for the acts of third parties.
- 2. Water supply and conveniences are not non-natural uses.
Cambridge Water v Eastern Counties Leather [1994] 2 WLR 53
editHamilton v Papakura District Council [2000] 1 NZLR 265
editTransco PLC v Stockport MBC [2004] 2 AC 1
editDefamation
editStatutes
editCases
edit- Charleston v News Group Newspapers Ltd [1995] 2 AC 65
- Mount Cook Group Ltd v Johnstone Motors [1990] 2 NZLR 488
- Templeton v Jones [1984] 1 NZLR 448
- Prebble v TVNZ [1994] 3 NZLR 1
- Jennings v Buchanan [2005] 2 NZLR 577
- Lange v Atkinson [1998] 3 NZLR 424 (CA)
- Reynolds v Times Newspapers [1999] 4 All ER 609 (HL)
- Lange v Atkinson [2000] 1 NZLR 257 (PC)
- Lange v Atkinson [2000] 3 NZLR 385 (CA)
- Vickery v McLean (2000) unreported, Court of Appeal, CA 125/00
Privacy
edit- Hosking v Runting [2005] 1 NZLR 1
- TVNZ v Haines (2005), CA 71/04
Vicarious Liability
edit- S v Attorney-General [2003] 3 NZLR 450 (CA)
- W v Attorney-General (2003) unreported, CA 227/02