Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2006 15:55:16 -0500

From: Geoff McLay

Subject: Stop press : no liability for not stopping patricide

Lewis

The answer to all of this is yes!

It is possible for victims to sue criminal for exemplary damages, but estates can sue for exemplary damages because we still have the odd English Tort Reform Act that prevents such claims (this obviously makes no sense, but it is the law).

In the best possible world ACC would have barred all of these claims and compensate the deserving ones. Cover under the Act is only triggered by an actual physical injury.

In a case earlier this year the surviving victim of a notorious shooting crime and husband (who claimed nervous shock) of the deceased from the same crime attempted to sue the probation service. Both claims were struck. The leading judgment in that case, Tia Hobson used as part of the justification for the decision, that ACC would bar compensatory damages so it would be wrong to allow the husband to extend common law to allow the husband to sue.

Geoff

-----Original Message-----
From: Lewis KLAR
Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2006 3:13 PM
To: 'Robert Stevens'; 'Jason Neyers'; Geof McLay
Subject: Re: ODG: stop press : no liability for not stopping patricide

Geoff:

Have not read the case ... but

Is it still the case in New Zealand that the Accident Compensation Scheme would bar an action being brought against the murderer by relatives of the deceased, since murder is a "personal injury caused by accident", or is this not so?

And if it is so, would New Zealanders not find it strange that while a murderer could not be sued in tort, the murderer could and would sue in tort someone who did not prevent him from murdering the victim (even if the action ultimately failed)?

<<<< Previous Message  ~  Index  ~  Next Message >>>>>