Search Results

1. [2006] NZEmpC AC 55/06 Downey v NZ Greyhound Racing Assoc Inc [pdf, 80 KB]

   ...stated in his evidence that the role was quasi-judicial in nature.) Integration [32] The integration test derives from the analysis of Lord Justice Denning (as he then was) in Stevenson Jordan & Harrison Ltd v Macdonald and Evans [1952] 1 TLR 101, 111: … under a contract of service, a man is employed as part of the business, and his work is done as an integral part of the business; whereas, under a contract for services, his work, although done for the business, is not integ...

2. Edwards v Tatere - Mangatainoka No 1BC No2C (2012) 15 Takitimu MB 204 (15 TKT 204) [pdf, 205 KB]

   ...operate. [100] Normally I would indicate the removal of trustees and call for a meeting for the election of replacement trustees, whereby I would remove and appoint new trustees at the same time. However, there is some urgency with this matter. [101] The applicants have provided a curriculum vitae for Mr Doug Hauraki. Mr Hauraki certainly has the relevant skills and experience to be a trustee in this case. Mr Hauraki is not working with the TATB, the Parish or the income benefi...

3. [2015] NZEmpC 225 Lumsden v Skycity Management Ltd [pdf, 206 KB]

   ...change would allow the Authority to dismiss frivolous or vexatious claims or defences of claims (or parts of a claim or a defence). This allows the Authority to dismiss cases with little or no merit…” 25 Employment Relations Act 2000, ss 101(a), 157(1). See also H v A Ltd [2014] NZEmpC 92, [2014] ERNZ 38 at [17]. Dunn accepted that the two provisions did not sit altogether comfortably, and that there may be room for argument about the interrelationship between them,...

4. Pue v Tapatu - Okawa A1B (2011) 268 Aotea MB 93 (268 AOT 93) [pdf, 165 KB]

   ...New Zealand courts have followed this general approach. For example see F Hammond Land Holdings Ltd v Elders Pasture Ltd (1989) 2 PRNZ 232 and Shivas v BTR Nylex Holding NZ Ltd [1997] 1 NZLR 318. 11 [2004] 2 NZLR 168 at 176 268 Aotea MB 101 [36] This case however is concerned with a permanent injunction. As a starting point for essential principles, although is a different context, in its judgment Eriwata v Trustees of Waitara SD s6 and 91 Land Trust - Waitara SD s6 and...

5. [2015] NZEmpC 84 Robinson v Pacific Seals New Zealand Ltd [pdf, 197 KB]

   ...miscarriage of justice. That is said to be because the Court heard evidence from the applicant’s mother which was relevant to the quantum of 2 Robinson v Pacific Seals (NZ) Ltd [2013] NZERA Wellington 101. 3 Robinson v Pacific Seals New Zealand Ltd, above n 1, at [64]. compensation awarded and ought to have had regard to this evidence in determining the challenge. It is common ground that this evidence was not before the...

6. Te Runanga o Ngati Hine v Te Runanga a iwi o Ngapuhi [2013] Māori Appellate Court MB 89 (2013 APPEAL 89) [pdf, 148 KB]

   ...non-fisheries related matters or whether such actions will be ultra vires are separate issues for determination. We are not persuaded therefore that this ground of appeal can succeed. Second ground of appeal 2013 Māori Appellate Court MB 101 The Tūhoronuku Proposal [46] The appellant contended that the Mäori Land Court was wrong in fact and in law to conclude that even if Ngāti Hine’s right to withdraw was a withdrawal for all purposes and TRAION could be no longer s...

7. Morgan v ACC [2010] NZACA 10 [pdf, 80 KB]

   ...Corporation was then entitled to consider. Further, it is not known whether the figure was based entirely on the appellant’s income in hand or also based on allowances such as the free telephone, expense account or private use of vehicle. [101] It is not known whether the Corporation was then informed of these allowances and, if so, what amount was placed thereon. Further, if the Corporation was informed, did the Corporation decline to include these amounts and, again, if so, why?...

8. BORA Countering Terrorist Fighters Legislation Bill [pdf, 362 KB]

   ...significant it is will depend on the circumstances. There may be other values and interests, including law enforcement considerations, which weigh in the particular case’: R v Grayson and Taylor [1997] 1 NZLR 399 (CA) at 407. [8]Hamed v R [2011] NZSC 101, [2012] 2 NZLR 305 at [172]. [9]See Klass v Germany (1979-80) 2 EHRR 214 and subsequent decisions. [10]Hansen at paras 53-56, 61, 150-158, 252, 285-290 (per Blanchard, Tipping, McGrath, Anderson JJ). [11]Hunter v Southam [1984] 2 SCR...

9. Tamati v Wainohu - Tamati Whanau Trust (2010) 5 Tairawhiti MB 87 (5 TRW 87) [pdf, 83 KB]

   ...of this whanau trust I would still expect simple meeting minutes to be kept and to be provided to beneficiaries. Meeting minutes can be handwritten into a notebook, or typed. The minutes can be emailed or posted around 5 Tairawhiti MB 101 the beneficiaries. An alternative could have been that the minutes and likewise bank statements or other accounts could be held in a safe place and made available for the beneficiaries to inspect. [69] I find that the trustees have...

10. AB v DE & Ors LCRO 75/2014 (11 July 2016) [pdf, 90 KB]

    ...(b) A requirement under ss 141 or 147; (c) An order made under s 156; and (d) A direction given pursuant to ss 142 or 143. 18 [100] The parameters of the LCRO’s power to review were considered in the decision of Lydd v Maryport.14 [101] For the most part, applications filed with the LCRO seek to review Standards Committee determinations, i.e. final and decided outcomes of a complaint. In that decision it was noted that “It is clear that not every step taken by a Stand...