Table of Contents
Judy Gill
When a tragedy occurs, the public instinctively asks two questions: How could this have happened and who is responsible?
In New Zealand, however, the answers to those questions are constrained by a legal framework that deliberately separates compensation from accountability, and prevents families from seeking civil redress even when a disaster appears foreseeable or preventable.
The recent landslide at Mount Maunganui has brought this disconnect into sharp focus.
Why families cannot sue for wrongful death
New Zealand operates a no-fault personal injury regime administered by the Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC).¹ Under this system, civil proceedings for personal injury or death are barred, regardless of fault or negligence.²
As a result:
· Families cannot bring wrongful-death claims
· Courts cannot award damages for pain, suffering, or loss of life
· Preventability does not create a civil cause of action.
Instead, ACC provides limited statutory support, including funeral grants, survivor payments, weekly compensation for dependants, and counselling services.³ These payments are automatic and not linked to blame.
For many families, this comes as a shock. Preventability does not translate into legal redress.
How accountability is handled instead
Although civil litigation is barred, accountability has not been abolished. It has been shifted from private lawsuits to public enforcement and inquiry.
The primary mechanism for accountability is the Health and Safety at Work Act 2015, New Zealand’s core safety statute.⁴
Under this act, any person conducting a business or undertaking (PCBU) – meaning any organisation that controls land, work or activities that may expose people to risk – has a duty to eliminate or minimise risks so far as reasonably practicable.⁵
This duty applies to:
· commercial operators (including campgrounds)
· local councils
· trusts and incorporated societies
· co-governance bodies any entity exercising real decision-making control.
There are no statutory exemptions for cultural purpose, environmental restoration or co-governance arrangements.⁶ The act is risk-based, not identity-based.
If a PCBU fails to manage a foreseeable risk, WorkSafe New Zealand may investigate and prosecute.⁷ Courts can impose substantial fines, make formal findings of failure and, in some cases, order reparations.⁸ However, fines are generally paid to the Crown, not to the affected families.
Coronial inquiries
A parallel accountability mechanism is the coronial process under the Coroners Act 2006.⁹
Coroners can:
· determine how and why deaths occurred
· assess whether deaths were avoidable
· identify systemic or decision-making failures
· make public recommendations to prevent recurrence.
Families may participate and be represented,¹⁰ but coronial proceedings do not award damages. Their function is truth-finding and prevention, not compensation.
Liability without civil redress
The combined effect of these systems is that:
· compensation is automatic but limited
· accountability is public but indirect
· responsibility may be formally recognised without civil damages.
Even if a disaster is later found to have been foreseeable and preventable, families cannot sue for the deaths themselves.² Support comes through ACC and accountability comes through WorkSafe prosecutions, coronial findings, and the public record.
Mount Maunganui
If land-management or governance decisions altered slope stability, removed vegetation with stabilising root systems, or otherwise increased risk to people below – and if those risks were foreseeable but inadequately managed – then those decisions fall squarely within New Zealand’s safety-law framework.⁴,⁵
Public safety obligations do not disappear because decisions were cultural, environmental, or well-intentioned. The law is concerned with control, foreseeability, and failure to manage risk, not motive.
The Mount Maunganui landslide forces a difficult national reckoning: preventable harm does not guarantee civil justice and accountability is mediated through institutions rather than courts. That reality deserves informed public scrutiny.
REFERENCES
¹ Accident Compensation Corporation – What ACC covers when someone dies
https://www.acc.co.nz/im-injured/what-we-cover/if-someone-dies/
² Accident Compensation Act 2001, ss26–32, 317–321
https://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2001/0049/latest/DLM99494.html
³ Accident Compensation Corporation – Financial support for families
https://www.acc.co.nz/im-injured/what-we-cover/support-after-a-death/
⁴ Health and Safety at Work Act 2015
https://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2015/0070/latest/DLM5976660.html
⁵ Health and Safety at Work Act 2015, s36 (Primary duty of care)
https://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2015/0070/latest/DLM5976847.html
⁶ Health and Safety at Work Act 2015 – absence of cultural or governance exemptions
https://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2015/0070/latest/DLM5976660.html
⁷ WorkSafe New Zealand – What happens after a serious injury or death
https://www.worksafe.govt.nz/managing-health-and-safety/serious-injury-or-death/
⁸ Health and Safety at Work Act 2015, Subpart 4 (Offences and penalties)
https://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2015/0070/latest/DLM5976990.html
⁹ Coroners Act 2006
https://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2006/0038/latest/DLM381805.html
¹⁰ Coronial Services of New Zealand – Information for families
https://coronialservices.justice.govt.nz/families/
