Plain language law

New Zealand law explained for everyone

Accident Compensation Act 2001

Dispute resolution - Reviews

145: Review decisions: substance

You could also call this:

“How decisions are reviewed and what reviewers can decide”

When someone reviews a decision made by the Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC), the reviewer has to look at the matter with fresh eyes. They need to ignore ACC’s original decision and any policies or procedures ACC used. Instead, they should focus on the facts of the case and what the law says.

If ACC has already changed their decision because they think they made a mistake, they need to prove that the first decision was wrong.

After looking at everything, the reviewer can do a few different things. They can say ACC was right and not change anything. They can change ACC’s decision a little bit. They can say ACC’s decision was completely wrong. If ACC hasn’t made a decision when they should have, the reviewer can tell ACC to make one quickly or even make the decision for them.

If the reviewer says ACC’s decision was wrong, they can either make a new decision themselves or tell ACC to make a new decision following certain instructions.

Sometimes, people who are allowed to speak at the review don’t show up. The reviewer can still make a decision unless the person has a good reason for not being there and the reviewer thinks it’s important to hear from them first.

This text is automatically generated. It might be out of date or be missing some parts. Find out more about how we do this.

This page was last updated on

View the original legislation for this page at https://legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1986/0120/latest/link.aspx?id=DLM101837.

Topics:
Crime and justice > Courts and legal help Government and voting > Government departments Health and wellbeing > Healthcare services
Previous

144: Review decisions: formalities, or

"Rules for writing down and sharing a reviewer's decision"

Next

146: Deemed review decisions, or

"If a review hearing isn't set within 3 months, you automatically win your case"

Part 5 Dispute resolution
Reviews

145Review decisions: substance

  1. In making a decision on the review, the reviewer must—

  2. put aside the Corporation's decision and look at the matter afresh on the basis of the information provided at the review; and
    1. put aside the policy and procedure followed by the Corporation and decide the matter only on the basis of its substantive merits under this Act.

      1. However, on the review of a decision revised by the Corporation under section 65(1), the Corporation must establish that the decision revised under that subsection was made in error.

      2. The reviewer must—

      3. dismiss the application; or
        1. modify the Corporation's decision; or
          1. quash the Corporation's decision; or
            1. direct the Corporation to make a decision within a time frame specified by the reviewer if the Corporation has not made the decision in a timely manner as contemplated by sections 54 and 134(1)(b); or
              1. make the decision for the Corporation if it has not made a decision in a timely manner as contemplated by sections 54 and 134(1)(b).

                1. If the reviewer quashes the Corporation's decision, the reviewer must—

                2. substitute the reviewer's decision for that of the Corporation; or
                  1. require the Corporation to make the decision again in accordance with directions the reviewer gives.

                    1. The reviewer may make a decision even though a person entitled to be present and heard at the hearing did not attend it unless, before the reviewer makes the decision,—

                    2. the person gives the reviewer a reasonable excuse for the person's non-attendance; and
                      1. the reviewer considers that a decision should not be made until the person has been heard.