Source: http://www.legislation.govt.nz/bill/government/2018/0082/latest/whole.html
Timestamp: 2019-03-23 14:27:51
Document Index: 17872836

Matched Legal Cases: ['art 4', 'art 1', 'art 2', 'art\n34', 'art 1', 'art 1']

Canterbury Earthquakes Insurance Tribunal Bill 82-2 (2018), Government Bill – New Zealand Legislation
82—2
The Governance and Administration Committee has examined the Canterbury Earthquakes Insurance Tribunal Bill and recommends that it be passed with the amendments shown.
The purpose of this bill is to establish the Canterbury Earthquakes Insurance Tribunal. The aim of the tribunal is to provide speedy, flexible, and cost-effective services to those involved in insurance disputes following the Canterbury earthquakes of 2010 and 2011. It is intended that the tribunal would be an independent judicial body as an alternative route for resolving insurance disputes.
Clause 2 is the commencement clause. We recommend amending subclause (1) so the sections listed would enter into force 28 days after the date of Royal assent. We also recommend amending subclause (2) because Royal assent is unlikely to occur before 25 March 2019, as envisioned by the bill as introduced. This would allow the tribunal to be set up following Royal assent, and to become fully operational 28 days later.
Clause 3 sets out the purpose of the bill and the tribunal. We recommend including the word “fair” as part of the purpose statement. This would reflect the requirement on the tribunal to provide fair services and to comply with natural justice. This would also entail some consequential amendments in other relevant clauses.
We also recommend rewording clause 30(1), which deals with mediation services, to ensure it is consistent with the purpose of the bill.
Defining which earthquakes would be covered by the tribunal
Clause 5 sets out the various definitions used throughout the bill. As introduced, the definition of “Canterbury earthquakes” is limited to earthquakes and any aftershocks occurring up until 31 July 2011. We recommend extending the date to 31 December 2011. This would account for the earthquake that occurred on 23 December 2011 and would ensure that another approximately 49,000 claims were included in the jurisdiction of the tribunal.
Other amendments to definitions
We also recommend amending the definitions of residential building and residential property under clause 8(4) to capture all similar terms that may be used in insurance contracts, for example the term “home”.
Clause 8 of the bill sets out when the Act would apply to an insurance dispute. We recommend inserting new clauses 8(2A) and 8(6) to allow the tribunal to decide liability for damage from earthquakes and aftershocks that occurred after 31 December 2011 in certain circumstances. This would only apply if at least some of the earthquake damage included in the claim occurred during the Canterbury earthquakes as defined in the bill, and the later damage is to the same residential building, property, or land. This would allow parties to amalgamate their disputes relating to the same building, property, or land and avoid having to go through separate processes for pre- and post-December 2011 earthquake damage. It would also minimise disputes over which damage occurred on what date.
Clause 9 sets out the eligibility criteria to bring a claim before the tribunal. We recommend inserting new clause 9(2) to clarify that the chairperson or a Judge would not be required to form a view on any question of law or assess the likelihood of success of a claim when determining whether the eligibility criteria have been met.
Clause 15 sets out how a respondent may file response documentation with the tribunal. We recommend inserting new clause 15(1A) to allow the tribunal to prescribe the form of the response to be filed.
Transferring proceedings from court to the tribunal
Clause 16 would allow policyholders or insured persons who have current court proceedings relating to their insurance claim to apply for their claim to be transferred from the court to the tribunal. Although the plaintiff would not need the consent of the other parties (such as insurers) to transfer the proceedings, we recommend inserting subclause (2)﻿(ab) to allow other parties a reasonable opportunity to comment on the application for transfer.
We also recommend amending clause 16 to allow applications to be made where there are more than two parties (such as multiple plaintiffs or defendants), but this would not extend to class actions.
Transferring proceedings from the tribunal to court
Clause 28 of the bill would do the opposite of clause 16, allowing claims from the tribunal to be transferred to court in certain circumstances. As with clause 16, we recommend amending clause 28 by inserting new subclause (1A) to allow the parties a reasonable opportunity to comment on the transfer before it takes place.
Referring questions of law to the High Court
Clause 51 would allow the tribunal to refer questions of law to the High Court for the Court to provide its opinion. We recommend inserting new clause 51(1A) to ensure the tribunal provides a reasonable opportunity for the parties to comment before any question is referred to the High Court.
We also recommend amending subclause (1) to specify that a question of law could be referred at any point in the process before the claim was determined, as opposed to only when preparing for, or during, the hearing of a claim.
Considerations before striking out a claim
Clause 9 of Schedule 2 would give the tribunal the power to strike out, decide on, or adjourn a claim based on certain criteria as set out in the clause (such as the claim no longer being eligible). To ensure the tribunal upholds its purpose of flexibility, we recommend inserting new clause 9(4) in Schedule 2. This would require the tribunal to consider whether a claim can be transferred to a court instead of striking it out. The transfer would then only take place with the agreement of all parties. This would ensure that claims are not struck out without alternative options being considered.
Use of experts in the tribunal
Subpart 4 of Part 1 of the bill deals with case management. Clause 20(4) in particular deals with managing the use of experts in claims. This clause as introduced would let the tribunal decide when to allow the use of experts by parties based on necessity. We recommend reversing the presumption and lowering the threshold in this clause to allow parties to use experts except where the tribunal deems it unnecessary. Reversing this presumption would uphold the principle of fairness for policyholders while ensuring that the tribunal retained the power to prevent unnecessary use of experts in the interests of fair, speedy, and cost-effective resolutions.
Combining expert evidence
We recommend inserting clause 41A. This clause would allow the tribunal to order that technical evidence on subject matter relevant to more than one claim could be heard at a special hearing with all affected parties present. This would be in the interests of efficiency and would only occur if all parties to any claim agreed.
Power of tribunal to inspect
Clause 24 sets out actions the tribunal may undertake during the first case management conference. We recommend adding another matter (new subclause (1)﻿(ga)) to give the tribunal the power to inspect a dwelling house, property, or land earlier in the process, as this may help with faster resolutions. The tribunal would already have this power under clause 39(1)﻿(i) but only in relation to the hearing stage of a claim.
Clause 35 relates to the enforcement of mediated settlements through the tribunal. We recommend rewording clause 35 to make it clear that all agreed terms of settlement reached through mediation would be recorded as a decision of the tribunal.
We also recommend that the tribunal be required to ensure all parties understand the effect of clause 35 before they enter into mediation. To do this, we recommend inserting new clauses 27(6), 24(4A), and 39(1A).
Clause 37 sets out requirements on the tribunal when managing the adjudication of claims. Clause 37(3) states that the tribunal must comply with the principles of natural justice. However clause 37(4) states that despite this the tribunal does not have to permit cross-examination or allow the use of experts. We recommend removing the reference to “absolute discretion” from clause 37(4)﻿(a), as it implies that the decision is not judicially reviewable and that is not the intent of the bill. We also recommend amending clause 37(4)﻿(b) to allow the use of experts unless the tribunal considers it unnecessary. This would ensure that the provision was consistent with clause 20 (which relates to the case management phase) as discussed above.
Clause 43 sets out the matters the tribunal may make decisions on. We recommend amending this clause to ensure the limits of the tribunal’s jurisdiction are clear and not wider than intended.
Substance of tribunal decisions
Clause 44 sets out factors that the tribunal could consider when making a decision on a claim. We recommend amending clause 44(1) to make it clear that the terms of the insurance contract and the general law of New Zealand would always be a relevant consideration for the tribunal when deciding a claim. We recommend achieving this by making those two factors compulsory considerations, rather than optional.
Clause 44(3) as introduced would allow the tribunal to require the payment of general damages (for example, mental distress). We recommend amending this clause to clarify that the intention of this legislation is to give the tribunal the power to award a remedy that a court could award in accordance with the general law of New Zealand. This amendment would ensure the clause is not interpreted more widely than intended.
We also recommend amending clause 44(7) to make it clear that the policyholder could ask the tribunal to record the settlement decision without needing the agreement of all parties. This would be in line with the overarching objective of the tribunal which is to aid policyholders in resolving their insurance disputes. We recommend consequential amendments to clauses 24(4B), 26(5), and 38(5). These amendments would require the tribunal to ensure that all parties understand the effect of recording the settlement (the effect of clause 44(7)).
Clause 45 deals with costs that the tribunal may award. We recommend clarifying the scope of this clause by inserting new subclause (1AA). This would make it clear that the tribunal could only award costs in accordance with clause 45, and not more generally. We also recommend inserting new subclause (2A) to ensure that the tribunal took into account whether the insurer was already liable to pay costs under the insurance contract. This amendment would be consistent with the purpose of the tribunal, which is to provide a cost-effective service. It would also remove the risk of a party paying the costs of the other party (except as provided for in the clause) and would take into account any other liability for costs under an insurance contract.
Clause 55 sets out the process for appointing members to the tribunal. We recommend inserting new subclause (1AA) to set a minimum of 1 member for the tribunal.
We also recommend inserting new subclause (4) to require the chairperson of the tribunal to have held a practising certificate as a barrister, or barrister and solicitor, of the New Zealand High Court for at least 7 years. This would ensure the chairperson has sufficient experience to undertake the role.
Clause 63 would exclude certain people from criminal or civil liability in certain circumstances. We recommend amending clause 63(1)﻿(b) to clarify that it also applies to the chairperson.
Clause 60 would allow the chairperson to delegate functions (except the function to delegate) to other members. The clause as introduced would not allow members to be paid additional remuneration for delegated functions. We recommend amending clause 60(5) to allow any member who undertakes delegated functions to be properly paid for that function. This would bring the bill into line with the Tribunals Powers and Procedures Legislation Act 2018.
Clause 33 of Schedule 2 provides for the reimbursement of tribunal members. However, the use of the word “salary” throughout this clause is incorrect, because members would not be employees of the tribunal. Therefore, we recommend substituting the word “remuneration” in this clause.
Clause 13 of Schedule 2 states that any party may give and call evidence. Clause 14 allows the tribunal to take such evidence on oath. We recommend amending clause 14 of Schedule 2 to make it clear that the tribunal could also take evidence on affirmation, and that it could require documents or information to be verified by oath, affirmation, statutory declaration, affidavit, or other means (new clause 14(1A)).
We also recommend inserting new clause 39A in Part 2 of the bill. This would allow the tribunal to seek and receive evidence on its own initiative, rather than only being able to rely on the parties to call evidence. This new clause would also include a requirement to disclose all evidence received by the tribunal to the parties and allow them reasonable opportunity to comment.
These powers would be consistent with the inquisitorial nature of the tribunal (see clause 54(b)).
Clause 22 of Schedule 2 sets out the annual report requirements of the tribunal, such as what details the annual report must include. We recommend amending clause 22(3) to specify that the report must also include the number of claims transferred from the courts, the number of claims settled through mediation (as opposed to having been decided by the tribunal), and the number of claims decided after a hearing in the tribunal. We also recommend that, under clause 22(4), the report must identify the number of claims filed against EQC as well as the number against the insurer.
Finally, we recommend inserting new clause 22(4A) into Schedule 2 to provide the tribunal chairperson an opportunity to highlight any other information in the report that they wished to include.
Adding these requirements would ensure that the Minister receiving the report was provided with key statistics regarding the tribunal, and ensure the report was consistent with the reporting practices of other tribunals in New Zealand.
The High Court Rules and the District Court Rules both provide for ways for incapacitated persons and minors to be supported in the courts. We recommend adding new clause 3A in Schedule 2 to apply the relevant District Court Rules to the tribunal. This would give the tribunal powers to ensure that incapacitated people who have applied to the tribunal, and minors who may be involved in claims, have the support they need in the tribunal.
The Canterbury Earthquakes Insurance Tribunal Bill was referred to the committee on 4 September 2018. The closing date for submissions was 18 October 2018. We received and considered 26 submissions from interested groups and individuals. We heard oral evidence from 10 submitters.
Stuart Smith participated in much of the consideration for this item of business.
29 MediationApplication of this subpart
34 Settlements to be notified provided to chief executive and tribunal
39A Tribunal’s powers to seek and receive evidence, investigate, and make inquiries
40 Expert advisers
41 Hearing of claim
41A Consolidation of expert evidence on same subject matter for multiple claims
42 Further provisions relating to tribunal
43 Matters tribunal may decide
44 Tribunal’s decision: substance
45 Costs
46 Tribunal may award interest
47 Tribunal’s decision: form
48 Nothing done by or relating to tribunal invalid for want of form because of failure to comply with technicality or legal form
49 Suppression orders
50 Enforcement of tribunal decisions (other than costs awards)
51 Questions of law may be referred to High Court
53 Canterbury Earthquakes Insurance Tribunal established
54 Nature of proceedings
55 Appointment of members of tribunal
56 Performance of functions of tribunal
57 Further provisions relating to tribunal members
58 Assignment of member to act as tribunal
59 Orderly and efficient operation
60 Delegation by chairperson
61 Registrar and staff
62 Contempt of tribunal
63 Exclusion of liability
64 Tribunal records
66 Rules of court: District Court and High Court
67 Consequential amendments to Acts
This Act is the Canterbury Earthquakes Insurance Tribunal Act 2018.
Sections 6, 8 to 52, 62, and 64 and Schedule 1 and Part 1 of Schedule 2 come into force on a date set by Order in Council, and 1 or more orders may be made bringing different provisions into force on different dates the day that is 28 days after the date of Royal assent.
Any provision that has not earlier been brought into force comes into force on 25 March 2019.
Canterbury earthquakes means 1 or more of the earthquakes on 4 September 2010, 26 December 2010, 22 February 2011, and 13 June 2011, and 23 December 2011, and any aftershocks until the close of 31 July December 2011
chairperson means the member of the tribunal appointed as the chairperson under section 55(3)
the person was the a plaintiff in proceedings that a court has transferred to the tribunal under section 16; or
an insurer or the EQC, if they were the a plaintiff in proceedings that a court has transferred to the tribunal under section 16
a policyholder or an insured person (or a person who is both) has both:
Despite subsections (1) and (2)(1), (2), and (2A), this Act does not apply if the ownership of the building, property, or land has been transferred to the policyholder or insured person under a sale and purchase agreement following the physical loss or damage giving rise to the insurance claim.
For the purpose of subsection (1), residential building and residential property have the meanings given in a contract of insurance between a policyholder and an insurer.—
For the purpose of subsection (2A),—
must be within the jurisdiction of the tribunal to make an order under section 44.
The However, the tribunal may order that an insurer or the EQC be joined as a respondent only if the claimant is both a policyholder and an insured person.
A claim in which the claimant is a policyholder or an insured person (or both) cannot continue in the tribunal unless at least 1 respondent is an insurer or the EQC. If 1 or both of the insurer and the EQC are removed and only a third party respondent remains, the claim must be treated as withdrawn.
A claim in which the claimant is an insurer or the EQC cannot continue in the tribunal unless 1 respondent is the policyholder or insured person. If the policyholder or insured person is removed and only a third party respondent remains, the claim must be treated as withdrawn.
If a claim is treated as having been withdrawn cannot continue in the tribunal under subsection (3) or (4) and one of the parties is a third party respondent, the claimant may pursue the claim against the third party respondent in another forum—
The application must set out (for both a first dispute and a second dispute (see section 8(2A)), if relevant)—
See clause 11 of Schedule 2 for requirements for service of notices.
If a person who is a policyholder or an insured person (or both) is a plaintiff in court proceedings relating to an insurance claim in dispute, a Judge may, on the application of the plaintiff that person or on the Judge’s own motion, order that the proceedings be transferred to the tribunal.
the proceedings meet the eligibility criteria for a claim under section 9 (however, the proceedings may also include additional parties to those referred to in section 8, but may not include a class action—see clause 5(2) of Schedule 2); and
If a person who is a policyholder or an insured person (or both) is a defendant in court proceedings relating to an insurance claim in dispute, a Judge may, on the application of the defendant that person, order that the proceedings be transferred to the tribunal.
If court proceedings are transferred to the tribunal, the a plaintiff in the proceedings becomes the a claimant before the tribunal.
However, subsection (3) does not require the tribunal to use or allow the use of experts unless, in the tribunal’s opinion, it is necessary to do so.
experts employed by the party.
At the first case management conference, the tribunal must inform the parties of the effect of section 44(7) (which relates to settlements by agreement between the parties (otherwise than through mediation under this Act)).
For the purpose of case management following the first case management conference and at any stage before the parties begin preparing for a hearing (if one is needed), the tribunal may, as it thinks fit considers appropriate in order to progress the claim,—
If a party has been joined to the claim since the first case management conference, the tribunal must as soon as practicable inform the new party and at the same time remind the other parties of the effect of section 44(7) (which relates to settlements by agreement between the parties (otherwise than through mediation under this Act)).
set a timetable for future steps to progress the claim, including for any of the things in paragraphs (b) to (j):
The chief executive must employ or engage persons to provide mediation services that are fair, speedy, flexible, and cost-effective to assist parties to resolve claims promptly and effectively.
any information or document , document, or other material created for the purposes of mediation (including any admission or agreed terms of settlement); and
No evidence is admissible in any court, or before any person acting judicially, of any information or document , document, or other material that, by subsection (1), is required to be kept confidential.
Nothing in the Official Information Act 1982 applies to any information or document , document, or other material disclosed to the mediator in the course of a mediation under this subpart.
Within 5 working days of becoming aware that a claim (or part of a claim) has been settled, the mediator must—
notify the tribunal that the claim (or part of the claim) has been settled; and
provide a copy of the agreed terms of settlement to the chief executive.
The parties to a claim (or part of a claim) that has been settled may apply to the tribunal for the agreed terms of settlement to be recorded as a decision of the tribunal.
If this occurs, the decision is enforceable in accordance with section 50.
The decision is enforceable under section 50.
However, the decision must be filed in the District Court before it can be enforced.
Section 33(4) (which relates to confidentiality) does not apply to a decision filed in the District Court in accordance with this section.
permit the cross-examination of a party or person, but it may in its absolute discretion do so:
use or allow the use of experts unless, in the tribunal’s opinion, it is necessary to do so.
If adjudication is necessary to resolve a claim, the tribunal must set a date for a case management conference to prepare for a hearing.
Section 26 (relating to flexibility for the tribunal to deal with the parties as it thinks fit considers appropriate to progress the claim) applies to case management under this subpart.
At the first case management conference to prepare for the hearing, the tribunal must inform the parties and, if a party is later joined to the claim following that conference, must as soon as practicable inform the new party and at the same time remind the other parties, of the effect of section 44(7) (which relates to settlements by agreement between the parties (otherwise than through mediation under this Act)).
Compare: 1996 No 99 ss 14G and 14H; 2006 No 84 s 106
Further provisions relating to the tribunal’s procedure, evidence, expert advisers, witnesses, an annual report to the Minister of Justice, provision of assistance and guidance to parties, and publication of information and decisions are set out in Part 1 of Schedule 2.
The tribunal may decide, under section 44,—
any liability of any respondent to the claimant any party to any other party; and
The tribunal may also decide—
any liability of any respondent to any other respondent; and
The tribunal may make any order that a court of competent jurisdiction could make in relation to a claim in accordance with any of the following that are relevant to the claim:
current lawthe general law of New Zealand, in particular,—
An order may require the payment of general damages (for example, for mental distress) in accordance with the general law of New Zealand.
if requested by the parties, may policyholder or insured person, may record the settlement in the form of a decision on agreed terms of the tribunal.
The agreement of all parties is not required before the tribunal records a settlement agreement as a decision under subsection (7)﻿(b).
The resulting decision is enforceable under section 50.
In this section, mental distress means 1 or more of the following:
emotional or mental anxiety:
distress or stress.
Compare: 2006 No 84 Schedule 4 s 90
the party caused costs and expenses to be incurred unnecessarily through by—
A costs award must relate to costs incurred by the parties only and not to costs incurred by the tribunal.
The tribunal must take into account any costs an insurer is liable to pay under an insurance contract.
No direction, decision, or order given or anything done by the tribunal, or anything done by anyone relating to the tribunal, is invalid for want of form because of a failure to comply with a technicality or legal form.
If application is made to the District Court for the issue of any process to enforce a decision by the tribunal setting an amount payable by a party who fails or refuses to do something by a certain date (see section 44(4)), the Registrar of the court must give written notice of the application to the party against whom enforcement is sought.
inquisitorial in nature (see, for example, the powers of the tribunal to seek and receive evidence, investigate, and make inquiries under section 39A).
Compare: 2006 No 1 s 239(5); 2009 No 51 s 218
Each member of the tribunal is appointed by the Governor-General on the recommendation of the Minister of Justice.
The Minister must recommend for appointment only people who, in the Minister’s opinion, are suitable to be appointed as members, taking into account their knowledge, skills, and experience.—
at least 1 person who has the experience required to be the chairperson under subsection (4).
as the tribunal to perform the functions required to be performed under section 64(4) (relating to access to tribunal records).
The chairperson may delegate any functions (except this function to delegate) to a member who the chairperson is satisfied has the necessary capability, skills, and experience to perform that function.
A member to whom a function is delegated is not entitled to additional remuneration for work undertaken in performing that function at the rate at which the chairperson would be paid to perform the function (also see clause 33 of Schedule 2).
The District Court (Access to Court Documents) Rules 2017 apply to access to the formal record of a claim by any person, or to other records and papers by the parties or by any person, with any necessary modifications; and in those rules references to the functions of a Judge are to be read as being references to the functions of the tribunal.
Amend the Acts specified in Schedule 3 as set out in that schedule.
ss 27, 39, 42, 57
3A Incapacitated persons and minors
4 Privileges and immunities of counsel
5 Consolidation of claims
7 Claim to continue on change of member acting as tribunal
8 Party’s failure to act does not affect tribunal’s ability to continue to hear and decide claim
9 Tribunal may strike out, decide, or adjourn claim
10 Withdrawal of claim
11 Service of notices
14 Tribunal may take evidence on oath
15 Tribunal may dispense with evidence if agreement by all parties
16 Tribunal may draw inferences from party’s failure to act and decide claim based on available information
17 Expert advisers not compellable witnesses
18 Party competent as witness
19 Witness summons and production of things in evidence
20 Protection and privileges of witnesses
21 Witnesses’ expenses
22 Annual report to Minister on performance of tribunal’s functions
23 Assistance and guidance for claimants and respondents parties
24 Online publication of information about procedures, time frames, and progress of decisions
25 Online publication of final written decisions
27 Oath of office
29 Resignation or removal from or vacation of office
30 Appointment of temporary acting chairperson or member
31 Duty of members to disclose conflicts of interest
32 Members not compellable witnesses
33 Salaries and allowancesRemuneration and expenses
Before striking out a claim, the tribunal must consider whether to instead transfer it to a court but may do so only if all parties agree. Section 28(2) and (3) applies to a transfer under this subclause.
On a charge of perjury, it is sufficient to prove that the oath or affirmation was administered, or the documents or information were verified, in accordance with subclause (1) this clause.
draw from the that failure any reasonable inferences it thinks fit; and
On each occasion on which the tribunal issues a summons under clause 19, the tribunal must fix an amount that must be paid to the witness either—
Each year the chairperson of the tribunal must report to the Minister of Justice on the tribunal’s performance in the period 1 July to 30 June.
the number of applications filed in that year:
the number of applications accepted as claims in that year:
the number of claims settled in that year through the mediation process provided under this Act:
the number of claims discontinued for other reasons in that year, for example, claims that were struck out or withdrawn:
The Ministry of Justice and the chief executive (for mediation only) may assist and guide claimants and respondents parties with the processes for dealing with claims.
non-publication is necessary because of a suppression order under section 49 or a statutory requirement that affects publication or continued publication:
does not include agreed terms of settlement recorded as a decision of the tribunal under section 35 or 44(7).
However, a member may not continue to act under subclause (3) or (4) if they are removed from or are treated as having vacated their office under clause 29(2) or (3).
A member may at any time resign from office by written notice given to the Minister of Justice.
If the chairperson or another member of the tribunal becomes incapable of acting by reason of illness, absence, or other sufficient cause, or if the chairperson or another member considers it is not proper or not desirable that they adjudicate on a particular claim, the Governor-General, on the recommendation of the Minister of Justice, may appoint a suitable person as an acting chairperson or acting member for the period or purpose stated in the appointment.
All members of the tribunal must be paid, or (including the chairperson) are entitled to be paid, and be reimbursed for, out of public money, without further appropriation than this section and in accordance with the fees framework,—
a fee, a salary, or an allowance, or any combination of those thingsremuneration for services as a member; and
actual and reasonable expenses incurred in performing their functions as a members.
For the period that an acting chairperson or acting member acts, they must be paid a salary and allowances are entitled to be paid remuneration calculated as a pro-rata proportion of the salary and allowances remuneration of a full-time chairperson or member respectively.
In this section clause, fees framework means the framework determined by the Government for the classification and remuneration of statutory and other bodies in which the Crown has an interest.
Schedule 3 Consequential amendments to Acts
After section 3(5)﻿(j), insert:
the Canterbury Earthquakes Insurance Tribunal: