Accessibility Skip to Global Navigation Skip to Local Navigation Skip to Content Skip to Search Skip to Site Map

Articles for the keyword(s) "Personal injury"

"New Zealand Conflict of Laws – A Bird’s Eye View"

FM Auburn and PRH Webb, 1977

In this section of an overview of New Zealand Conflict of Laws, the impact of the Accident Compensation Scheme on transnational tort litigation is considered. The authors discuss the interpretation and application of the double actionability rule for tort within the context of the bar on proceedings for damages in terms of the Accident Compensation Act 1972, with specific reference to the problem of foreigners’ loss of earnings.

^ Top of page

"Asbestos, Australia and ACC"

Elsabe Schoeman and Rosemary Tobin, 2005

This contribution examines the implications of the New Zealand Accident Compensation Scheme for asbestos-related trans-Tasman disputes. The authors focus on the significance of establishing the place of the tort in these cases of negligent omission (failure to warn) in order to determine the lex loci delicti commissi. Jurisdictional issues, such as forum non conveniens, are also considered briefly.

^ Top of page

"A Holiday in New Zealand: The Implications of New Zealand’s Accident Compensation Scheme"

Elsabe Schoeman and Rosemary Tobin, 2005

This note illustrates the application of the Injury, Prevention, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2001 to a personal injury claim in the hypothetical case of a foreign (German) student who was injured in New Zealand and institutes proceedings in a German court. The focus is on the statutory bar in respect of compensatory damages and the characterisation of the bar as either substantive or procedural.

^ Top of page

"New Zealand Accident Compensation and the Foreign Plaintiff: Some Conflict of Laws Problems"

Giora Shapira, 1980

The author looks at the implications of the New Zealand Accident Compensation Scheme for foreign plaintiffs, and the inadequacy of recovery, within the context of the double actionability rule for tort. The challenge for tort choice of law is to secure a proper remedy for the foreign plaintiff, while protecting local defendants against tort liability. Since the double actionability rule cannot achieve this, the author explores the “proper law of the tort” doctrine as applied in US case law concerning workmen’s compensation statutes.

^ Top of page

"Renvoi: Throwing (and Catching) the Boomerang – Neilson v Overseas Projects Corporation of Victoria Ltd"

Elsabe Schoeman, 2006

The author examines the decision in Neilson v Overseas Projects Corporation of Victoria Ltd [2005] HCA 54 with specific reference to the application of renvoi in transnational tort litigation and the application of a (foreign) flexible exception to the lex loci delicti. In regard to both of these matters, the case presented unique problems as a result of inadequate proof of the foreign (Chinese) law concerned. The author submits that renvoi and (foreign) exceptions are not appropriate ways of dealing with a rigid forum choice of law rule for tort.

^ Top of page

“Woodhouse Reprised: Accident Compensation and Trans-Tasman Integration”

Reid Mortensen, 2003

The author provides an in depth analysis of the ways in which New Zealand’s accident compensation scheme is inadequately accommodated by the Trans-Tasman Proceedings Acts. The disparities between the compensation provided by the ACC and common law damages available for personal injury claims in the Australian States is said to be the principle cause of forum shopping within the trans-Tasman area. The author demonstrates how overemphasis on the similarities between the legal systems of New Zealand and Australian has resulted in statutory drafting that is ill equipped to deal effectively with this issue. By way of solution statutory amendment is recommend for both the Trans-Tasman Proceedings Acts as well as the Accident Compensation Act.

^ Top of page

"New Zealand Conflict of Laws – A Bird’s Eye View"

FM Auburn and PRH Webb, 1978

In this section of an overview of New Zealand Conflict of Laws, the impact of the Accident Compensation Scheme on transnational tort litigation is considered. The authors discuss the interpretation and application of the double actionability rule for tort within the context of the bar on proceedings for damages in terms of the Accident Compensation Act 1972, with specific reference to the problem of foreigners’ loss of earnings.

^ Top of page

"Harding v Wealands: Substance v Procedure in the English Courts"

Elsabe Schoeman, 2007

This comment on Harding v Wealands [2006] UKHL 32 addresses two issues in transnational tort litigation: (1) the application of an exception to a general tort choice of law rule, and (2) the role of the substance-procedure dichotomy. The author submits that the substance-procedure distinction is being manipulated to achieve the desired result, while the focus should be on the identification of the appropriate lex causae.

^ Top of page

“The Australia and New Zealand Judgments Scheme: A Common Law Judicial Area”

Oliver L Knöfel and Reid G Mortensen, 2011

This article provides a comprehensive background to the enactment of the trans-Tasman Proceedings Acts in both Australia and New Zealand within the context of the Closer Economic Relations Trade Agreement (1983) between the two countries. It also provides a comparative perspective on the trans-Tasman vis-à-vis European Union, other European and Hague Conference arrangements in the area of cross-border jurisdiction and judgments. Discussing the details of the new trans-Tasman scheme, the authors identify a number of potential obstacles, one of those being the very different accident compensation schemes obtaining in New Zealand and Australia. On the whole, however, the scheme promises to be most successful in the regulation of trans-Tasman jurisdiction and judgments.

^ Top of page

“Assumption of Jurisdiction – Supreme Court of Canada Simplifies its Test”

Maya Mandery, 2013

This article discusses the new analytical framework on assumption of jurisdiction in tort actions involving foreign defendants set by the Supreme Court of Canada in the three cases: Club Resorts Ltd v Van Breda 2012 SCC 17, [2012] 1 SCR 572; Editions Ecosociete Inc v Banro Corp 2012 SCC 18, [2012] 1 SCR 636 and Breeden v Black 2012 SCC 19, [2012] 1 SCR 666. The framework ensures that courts will have presumptive jurisdiction over multi-jurisdictional disputes concerning tort claims in cases where the tort was committed within the province. The clear separation and identification of the factors relevant for both the existence of jurisdiction over tort claims and the inquiry into the discretionary exercise of jurisdiction, provides useful comparative perspectives for New Zealand courts when dealing with multiple-jurisdictional tort claims.

^ Top of page

"Reform of Choice of Law Rules for Tort"

Jack Wass and Maria Hook, 2017

The authors comment upon various aspects of the Private International Law (Choice of Law in Tort) Bill. The Bill abolishes the long-standing double actionability rule governing the choice of law in tort claims in New Zealand. The approach mandated by the Bill is that the New Zealand courts apply the lex loci delicti, with a flexible exception where the case is substantially more closely connected with another country. The authors explain the Bill’s approach and argue that it is sufficiently versatile to cover claims such as defamation and breach of intellectual property rights. The authors suggest that the Bill should exclude the doctrine of renvoi, given that the function of choice of law rules is to identify which country’s law New Zealand courts, not foreign courts, should apply to a particular claim. Finally, the authors recommend that the Bill allow for future common law developments in cases where parties agree as to the law that should apply to tort claims arising within their relationship.