Having already contributed millions of taxpayer dollars by way of accident compensation for overseas tourists as victims of the 2019 Whakaari/White Island volcanic eruption, US lawyers’ attempt to have taxpayer-funded Tourism New Zealand together with Geological and Nuclear Sciences dragged into US litigation against cruise operator Royal Caribbean Cruises was blocked in the High Court on grounds of sovereign immunity.
Tourists and guides on Whakaari Island suffered serious injuries during an unexpected eruption in December 2019. Most were visiting on a tour package booked through Caribbean Cruises, from ‘Ovation of the Seas,’ then docked at Mount Maunganui. Twenty-two died.
New Zealand law prohibits legal action seeking compensation for personal injury by accident. A statutory insurance scheme covers hospital care and rehabilitation plus compensation for lost income.
This disaster saw Accident Compensation immediately release millions of dollars to support increased health sector costs, in particular offshore purchases of skin needed for multiple grafts treating badly scalded victims.
Accident Compensation is funded directly and indirectly by taxpayers; through levies and government grants.
New Zealand’s accident compensation legislation is no bar to separate legal action being taken offshore by citizens of other countries for compensation following injury in New Zealand.
Legal action is underway in Florida. A number of tourists injured, and descendants of those killed, are suing Royal Caribbean Cruises alleging it is liable for failing to warn of the risks.
As part of pre-trial procedures, the New Zealand High Court was requested by the Florida court to take evidence on oath from both Tourism New Zealand and Geological and Nuclear Sciences.
A list of questions was provided.
It looks innocent enough; litigants seeking information about operational procedures and information held by each organisation.
Lurking behind these questions is the possibility both organisations might be dragged into the US litigation, with Royal Caribbean Cruises wanting to argue these taxpayer-owned organisations are the ones responsible for issuing any warnings.
In the High Court, Justice Wilkinson-Smith ruled both organisations were excused from having to answer any questions.
Evidence Act rules govern ‘letters of request’ from overseas courts.
In general, the High Court will enforce these requests, having the named individual or organisation give evidence on oath which is then sent back to the requesting court.
All countries reserve the right to say no.
The Evidence Act states letters of request cannot be enforced against ‘the crown’ or its employees; recognising what in legal jargon is called the doctrine of sovereignty. No independent country takes willingly to being bossed around by another.
‘Crown’ is not defined.
Neither Tourism New Zealand nor Geological and Nuclear Sciences are government ministries or government departments. They are ‘crown entities.’
They are funded by taxpayers. Directors are appointed by government. Directors do have operational freedom, but are required to comply with government policy directives.
There is sufficient crown control of each organisation for them to be defined as ‘crown,’ Justice Wilkinson-Smith ruled.
She refused to order compliance with the Florida court’s letter of request.
Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd v. Tourism New Zealand – High Court (13.08.24)
24.194