Rasulullah Shallallahu ‘Alaihi Wasallam Melarang, Jangan Makan dengan Posisi Seperti ini

Sumber : islam populer

Personal Injury Attorneys Near Me

In McGougan and Dingle v Depuy International Limited [2016] NZHC 2511 the High Court was required to determine the scope of the bar against claims for personal injury in s 317(1) of the Accident Compensation Act 2001 (ACA). The particular question for consideration was whether a person could bring a claim for compensatory damages (i.e. sue for damages flowing from personal injury) in New Zealand, where they have cover under the ACA, but where the conduct giving rise to the claims occurred outside of New Zealand.

Collins J decided that the plain words of the ACA, together with its purpose, precluded the plaintiffs from bringing their claim for compensatory damage. The fact was that the claimants had cover under the clear terms of the ACA, which was accepted by all parties. The bar was therefore clearly engaged. His Honour reiterated that it remains open for a plaintiff to bring a claim for exemplary damage arising from personal injury in New Zealand. His Honour summarised the position in this way:

[124] One of Parliament's intentions when it passed s 317(1) of the [ACA] was to bar proceedings for personal injury where the plaintiff has cover under the Act. The fact the conduct giving rise to the claim occurred in another jurisdiction does not deflect from Parliament's clear intention. If a plaintiff has cover for personal injury under the [ACA] Parliament intended he or she should not also be able to sue for compensatory damages in relation to his or her personal injury.