Abstract:
This paper, in light of the recent Supreme Court’s decision in Allenby v H, examines the state of entitlements available under New Zealand’s accident compensation scheme for unwanted conceptions. It argues that not only are the entitlements under the scheme limited in comparison to those available as common law damages in other jurisdictions but that the Supreme Court’s decision exacerbated discrepancies already present in the
scheme. It demonstrates that courts in general struggle to address the extent of entitlements that can and should be recognised in cases of unwanted conception, and concludes that Allenby provides the strongest signal so far that explicit statutory clarity is required on the matter and it is the legislature (rather than the courts) which is best
placed to do so.
