I found this post on another site (which I won't identity because it is a very unsafe/dangerous place for vulnerable ACC claimants to visit) and have reposted it here for all members and visitors/guests to read.
Thank you to "magnacarta" for making us aware of Mirima Dean's review report.
A link to the report/review can be found below "magnacarta's quoted post.
Miriman Dean report Focus on this
Posted 16 December 2016 - 09:55 AM
Instead of attacking each other on this forum what about concentrating on something that can change the system for the common good such as:-
Having read and analysed Miriam Dean QC’s May 2016 review report and recommendations, I am most surprised that she has not addressed a central issue raised by Acclaim Otago in 2105. Further, she has not referred the relevant issues raised to the Heads of Bench in the Courts hierarchy.
For example, a central plank of concerns was that the Acclaim Otago researchers examined more than 500 written decisions of the District Court, the High Court and the Court of Appeal that were decided between 2009 and 2015.
From that, they found that;- “….court decisions often not using the ACC statute or other similar cases and to basic protections under the ACC legislation.”
Mr Dean made comments about what she thought should happen (page 37 of her report) but, in reality, that was her ideal wish list and not the reality.
The complaint should have been referred to the Heads of Bench of the Courts (for consideration and remedy) rather than Ms Dean just offering her personal opinion. In fact, claimants don’t know what a judge will say or do in decisions until they do it. And then claimants are saying that’s not accurate or the truth. Confirmation bias or uniformity of thinking in the judiciary is also a major concern.
Moreover, the Acclaim Otago report was publicly endorsed by (a) leading practitioners in the ACC jurisdiction including 3 lawyers (it was praised in the foreword by a Court of Appeal judge, Hon Justice Winkelman, as a helpful addition to research about present problems with access to justice and © it was supported and endorsed by The University of Otago Legal Issues Centre and the Dean of Law at Otago University Professor Mark Henaghan.
On that basis, in my view Ms Dean’s overall review report is inadequate and has not addressed a most central plank of complaint. Ms Dean was definitely aware of these particular issues because I, and I understand others, told her so.
The Minister will now need to address these concerns and refer the matters to the Heads of Bench of the Courts hierarchy.
The Miriman Dean report
http://www.mbie.govt...dent-review.pdf
