Law (Legal Foundations)

**This paper is SPECIFIC to New Zealand Law****READ INSTRUCTIONS THOROUGHLY**
Instructions:Read the facts in Vallelly v ACC; Edmeades v ACC and answer the TWO questions that follow.
Note:You are limited to 1000 words (including headings and footnotes). Limit your consideration of the law to the material contained in your Law Casebook, Lectures, and the decision in J v ACC [2017] NZCA 441. Please cite legal materials in a manner that is consistent with the ‘141 Abridged Style Guide’.
Marking Criteria
You are expected to:(A) Identify the relevant legal standards;
(B) Explain how the legal standards apply to the factual circumstances;
(C) Resolve any uncertainty, disagreement, or contest, that may arise from the application of the law to the factual circumstances; and(D) Articulate the legal analysis in a clear, logically structured, & appropriately referenced, manner.
Vallelly v ACC; Edmeades v ACC
Neil Vallelly is a 36-year-old accountant who was signed to a professional football team (the Wellington Phoenix) in 2020 after playing first division amateur football for over 18 years. As part of his contract, if he played regularly, Neil would earn $800,000 per year, for five years (Neil previously earned $80,000 per year working as an accountant). However, Neil is getting old (for a professional football player), and he has had a recurring knee injury that has developed from gradual ‘wear and tear’ of the knee joint from years of physical activity.
Neil also started a romantic relationship with Lynley Edmeades, a University Lecturer and avant-garde poet, in 2020. Lynley was born with a visual impairment (she is ‘legally blind’ as her field of vision is less than 20 degrees in diameter). She decided that, since she cannot afford the support that raising a child with a visual impairment would require, she does not want to fall pregnant. Lynley underwent a sterilisation operation. Unbeknown to her, the operation was carelessly performed by the surgeon (the clips that should have been placed on her fallopian tubes were instead attached to her bladder wall reflection) and it was unsuccessful. It was not long until Lynley became pregnant.
Towards the end of the 2020 season Neil’s knee injury became a problem. He accepted the (sound) medical advice that the knee requires surgery. The surgery, however, was carelessly performed by the surgeon (the mental cap around the joint was placed at an incorrect angle by the surgeon). Neil now has reduced movement in his right knee. Whilst he is able to undertake almost all forms of physical activity, he is unable to play professional football because of the constrained movement in his right knee.
This year has seen Neil and Lynley welcome a healthy baby boy into their lives. However, unable to play football, Neil has earned no income from the Wellington Phoenix, and Lynley now carries the responsibilities of parenthood, whilst visually impaired, that she sought not to be confronted with.
#1. What forms of compensation would Neil be entitled to under the Accident Compensation Act 2001? [50 Marks]
#2. What forms of compensation would Lynley be entitled to under the Accident Compensation Act 2001? [50 Marks]
IMPORTANT NOTE:***In the file attached, there are 27 pages. Pages 1 and 2 are the basic instructions of what this paper/assignment requires (mainly what’s been covered above) – 1,000-word LIMIT, *IMPORTANT* MARKING CRITERIA and what’s EXPECTED in a good successful paper, the facts in Vallelly v ACC; Edmeades v ACC as well as the TWO QUESTIONS the paper is based on.***
– Pages 3 to 27 is regarding the decision in “J v ACC[2017] NZCA 441″ which includes very useful and helpful law material that could be relevant to this assignment. THIS J v ACC [2017] NZCA 441” DECISION IS ONLY THERE to show some guidance on what sort of materials to take into consideration when discussing wrongful birth compensation (as the assignment is regarding compensation for wrongful birth) and the J v ACC case study should probably be used as a source/evidence towards the final decision.