4 June 2009

Executive summary

1. This paper provides further information you requested at our meeting on 27 May on costs of claims for wilfully self-inflicted injuries and suicides.
2. The paper also includes, for the “repugnant to justice” provision, exploration of the following considerations:
   1. The sorts of crimes that would be caught by the proposed “repugnant to justice” criteria, including the criterion that that the person’s crime was subject to a maximum possible term of imprisonment of a specified number of years.  Crimes that could be considered “repugnant to justice” have maximum sentences of more than five to seven years.  We recommend that the fourth criterion for the “repugnant to justice” provision set the sentence level at either five or seven years.
   2. A restricted definition of treatment.  Treatment includes acute hospital treatment, treatment by treatment providers including GPs, and elective surgery.  We recommend that the definition of treatment for the “repugnant to justice” provision include elective surgery if that surgery is necessary for a claimant to return to work.
   3. Providing for Ministerial discretion to allay the harshness of the criteria.  We recommend that ACC is able to apply to the Minister for ACC in cases where ACC is of the view discretion may be appropriate; alternatively, you may wish to reconsider allowing ACC to apply to the District Court in such cases. 
   4. The possibility of ACC not paying entitlements from the time a person is charged until a person’s case is heard and a verdict reached.  This type of provision is likely to be contrary to the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990, delays in court processes of 12 to 16 ½ months mean that early rehabilitation is not possible and ACC will have difficulty accessing the information required.  We recommend that this restriction is not included as part of the “repugnant to justice” provision.
   5. A table containing information about past “repugnant to justice” cases is also included.

Recommended action

It is recommended that you:

1. Note the information in this paper provided on wilfully self-inflicted injuries and suicides and the “repugnant to justice” provision in the IPRC Amendment Bill 2009.
2. Agree that the “repugnant to justice” criterion that the person’s crime was subject to a maximum possible term of imprisonment for a specified period be set at
   
   

   EITHER

   2.1   Five years

   AGREE/ DO NOT AGREE

   OR

   2.2   Seven years

   AGREE/ DO NOT AGREE

3. Agree that the definition of treatment for the “repugnant to justice” provision includes elective surgery only where it is necessary to return a claimant to work
   
   

   AGREE/ DO NOT AGREE

4. Agree that you wish to provide ACC the ability to, in its own discretion when it considers the circumstances warrant it, seek an exception to the “repugnant to justice” disentitlement



EITHER

4.1   From the Minister for ACC

AGREE/ DO NOT AGREE

OR

4.2  From the District Court

AGREE/ DO NOT AGREE

5. Note that delaying payment of entitlements until a verdict is reached under the “repugnant to justice” provision may be contrary to the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990, delay rehabilitation of a claimant who is innocent and that ACC will have difficulty identifying such claimants.
6. Agree that payment of entitlements is not delayed until a verdict is reached under the “repugnant to justice” provision and that ACC is not required to recover the payments.
   

AGREE / DO NOT AGREE

 

 

Dave Spence                                                         Hon Dr Nick Smith
Workplace Policy Manager – ACC                               Minister for ACC
for Secretary of Labour

 

                                                                           ...... / ...... / ......

 

---