Anna Elizabeth Osborne v Worksafe New Zealand

[2017] NZSC 90

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW ZEALAND

SC 23/2017
[2017] NZSC 90

BETWEEN

ANNA ELIZABETH OSBORNE AND SONYA LYNNE ROCKHOUSE
Applicants

AND

WORKSAFE NEW ZEALAND
First Respondent

DISTRICT COURT AT WELLINGTON
Second Respondent

Court:	Elias CJ, William Young and Ellen France JJ
Counsel:	K N Hampton QC and S N Meikle for Applicants J C Holden and M J R Conway for First Respondent No appearance for Second Respondent
Judgment:	19 June 2017

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

AThe application for leave to appeal is granted in part (Osborne v Worksafe New Zealand [2017] NZCA 11).

BSubject to the qualification discussed at [1], the approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to dismiss the applicants’ appeal to that Court.

____________________________________________________________________

REASONS

1. The applicants also sought leave to challenge the Court of Appeal’s conclusion that the decision of Judge Farish in the District Court[1] was not unlawful by reason of the Judge’s failure to recuse herself.[2]  This is an issue related to the particular circumstances of this case and does not meet the criteria for leave to appeal to this Court.  The application for leave to appeal is refused on this point.

   [1]Department of Labour v Whittall DC Christchurch CRI-2012-018-0821, 12 December 2013.

   [2]Osborne v Worksafe New Zealand [2017] NZCA 11, [2017] 2 NZLR 513 (Kós P, Randerson and French JJ) at [99].

Solicitors:
S N Meikle, Wellington for Applicants
Crown Law Office, Wellington for First Respondent