![handle is hein.journals/jrlpil9 and id is 1 raw text is: DO:10.5235/17441048.9.1.1
WOODHOUSE REPRISED: ACCIDENT COMPENSATION
AND TRANS-TASMAN INTEGRATION
REID MORTENSEN*
Gleeson CJ [Australia]: It is a big thing for a court to put up a sign saying 'No
business today'.
Douglas QC: It is a question of who you provide the business for, your Honour.
Gleeson CJ: I suppose the practical consideration behind all this is that New Zealand
has a 'no fault' system of compensation for personal injury
Douglas QC: It does, your Honour, yes.
Gleeson CJ: Which might be either beneficial or detrimental to a plaintiff depend-
ing upon how the plaintiff thinks he or she can go on the issue of liability and
contributory negligence.'
A. INTRODUCTION2
Australia and New Zealand have made private international law the source of
co-ordinating principles for the legal integration of the trans-Tasman single
economic market. The Trans-Tasman Proceedings Acts, implemented in both
countries, give all courts in Australia and New Zealand an unquestioned power
to judge proceedings commenced by service of a writ anywhere in the market
area.3 The Acts also give a power, barely qualified,' to enforce anywhere in
* Professor of Law, University of Southern Qucensland, Toowoomba, Australia. For comments
on the ideas in this article, I thank Richard Garnett, David Goddard QC and Warren Forster,
and participants at the Journal of Private International Law Colloquium, University of Auckland,
14 August 2012, and at earlier seminars at the Universities of Canterbury and Otago. I also
acknowledge the support of Profcssor Philippa Mein Smith and the New Zealand Australia
Research Centre at the University of Canterbury while conducting research in this area.
1 James Hardie & Coy lid v Grigor [1998] HCATrans 274.
2 In this article:
ACA = Accident Compensation Act 2001 (NZ).
Aust = Trans-Tasman Procecdings Act 2010 (Cth), as amended by the Trans-Tasman
Proceedings Amendment and Other Measures Act 2011 (Cth).
NZ = Trans-Tasman Procecdings Act 2010 (NZ).
References to the Australian states are taken to include the federal territories.
3 Aust, s 9, NZ, s 13.
4 Enforcement can bc rcsisted on the ground that it would bc contrary to the public policy of
the place where enforcement is sought: Aust, s 72(1)(a); NZ, s 61(2)(b). See text accompanying
infra nn 257 67.
Vol. 9 No. 1I
Journal of 1Bivate International Law)
1](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.journals/jrlpil9&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)
What Is HeinOnline?
Contact us for annual subscription options:
Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?
profiles profiles most
Contact us for annual subscription options:
Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?
profiles profiles most
Contact us for annual subscription options:
Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?
profiles profiles most