Search Results

1. [2021] NZREADT 52 - QH v KE, SE & Agency (14 October 2021) [pdf, 299 KB]

   ...would be determined in the course of considering the appeal. DISCUSSION [100] There is a preliminary issue as to whether QH can adduce various items of evidence not provided to the Committee. Whether further evidence can be produced by QH [101] As noted above, this appeal is a rehearing of the case as presented to the Committee. A party is not entitled as of right to produce a new version of the events or new evidence. The Tribunal can, however, give leave to adduce new evid...

2. [2022] NZEnvC 234 Paterson Pitts Limited Partnership v Dunedin City Council [pdf, 18 MB]

   ...particular, was not "on" the variation. Even the potential for the existing heritage listings was not an outcome that a person reading the notified documents would reasonably contemplate as an outcome of the submission and hearing process. [101] Although inadequate heritage protection was raised in the Murray submission, the permissible scope of submissions was framed by the notified variation and accompanying information, particularly the s32 report which were obviously...

3. [2023] NZEmpC 74 Nelmac Ltd v Reunited Employees Assoc Inc [pdf, 339 KB]

   ...awards will be modest; (j) frequently costs are judged against a notional daily rate; and (k) the nature of the case can also influence costs and this has resulted in the Authority ordering costs lie where they fall in certain circumstances. [101] In Da Cruz the Court was satisfied that those principles are appropriate and consistent with the Authority’s functions and powers.29 In the same case the Court 29 At [45]. concluded that there was nothing wrong in principle...

4. LCRO 49/2022 & 93/2022 WU v MQ obo CT (25 August 2022) [pdf, 277 KB]

   ...Beneficiaries. Charities. 1/3 each. Banking Mandate. [CT] trust. Send [AR] deed of trust. Get back to [WU] with amount of loan and interest rate. More budgeting. Go to see share broker. Make [MQ] appointee of trust in [CT]’s will. [101] To conclude the discussion about this meeting, Mr MQ asserts that Mr CT instructed Mr WU to amend his will. Mr WU was a party to the conversation and says that matters were left on the basis that Mr CT would consider matters and let...

5. [2022] NZACC 100–Phillips v ACC (25 May 2022) [pdf, 343 KB]

   ...dismissed by the organisation, for what other reason could they force her to hand over her assigned laptop and computer access. She says she returned to her car shaking and upset and was in tears later in the day as related it to her family. [101] In relating these events in Court and in presenting her case, the appellant was frequently tearful and had to stop on several occasions to compose herself. She was supported in Court by her husband, two daughters and a friend. The way i...

6. Melrose v Porter - Torere Section 58 [2022] Maori Appellate Court MB 209 (2022 APPEAL 209) [pdf, 360 KB]

   ...MB 186. p. 98 9 Porter v Melrose – Torere Section 58 (2021) 265 Waiariki MB 193 (265 WAI 193). 10 At 201 of transcript. 11 At 205-206 of transcript. 2022 Māori Appellate Court MB 214 1996 Trust review due: cl. 4.c. Trust Order. p. 101 22 March 2015 Neville Patu (trustee) passes away. p. 111 20 October 2018 Annual meeting of owners, at which current appellants resigned. p. 91, 189, 213- 220 5 September 2019 Rover Waiapu (trustee) passes away. p. 110 22 November...

7. [2022] NZREADT 7 - WM & NU v Real Estate Agents Authority (28 April 2022) [pdf, 317 KB]

   ...retraining. Additionally, they seek to recover certain costs. On the other hand, Mr Cartwright contends that, since the Committee made incorrect findings about his conduct, the penalty was based on incorrect assumptions and was excessive. [101] Any discussion of the orders has to have regard to Mr Cartwright’s previous disciplinary record, as noted by the Committee in setting the orders. Previous disciplinary record of Mr Cartwright [102] On 6 July 2018, the Tribunal found Mr...

8. [2022] NZEmpC 4 Chief of the New Zealand Defence Force v Darnley [pdf, 401 KB]

   ...upset and stress. [99] Accordingly, Ms Darnley has a sustainable grievance for unjustifiable disadvantage in relation to the 8 April 2019 letter. Compensation [100] Ms Darnley has not lost any earnings in relation to this disadvantage. [101] She gave evidence as to the effect on her of the plaintiff’s conduct. It is difficult to separate out the effects of this breach from those which resulted from the broader investigation and a disciplinary process. [102] In relation to...

9. LCRO 88/2018 MC v OT (24 December 2018) [pdf, 225 KB]

   ...OT’s view that his hourly rate fairly reflects his expertise and experience. [100] Mr MC, in providing response to Mr OT, says that “Mr BL neither states nor implies the rate is acceptable, on the contrary he implies it is excessive”. [101] I do not agree that clear inference can be drawn from Mr BL’s correspondence that he was suggesting that Mr OT’s charge out rate was excessive. He was simply noting that Mr OT’s fee was “at the top end”. [102] Mr BL does not fo...

10. LCRO 177/2021 FA v LL (14 March 2022) [pdf, 238 KB]

    ...a very serious matter for a legal practitioner”, and that the gravity of the Committee’s finding in the present matter has been reflected in its penalties and orders. Those orders include compensation to Ms FA for hurt and humiliation. [101] When assessing the appropriateness of the Committee’s penalties, I put to one side the orders of compensation and costs, because neither is punitive. The Committee would not, for example, have reduced the fine it imposed because it had a...