Search Results

1. LCRO 170/2020 KLM Limited v ND (30 March 2021) [pdf, 276 KB]

   ...nature of mediation” to Mr OE. [100] In support of [ABJ]’s concern that Mr OE “was sympathetic” to [KLM], Mr ND says Mr OE did not send to [ABJ] his 28 August 2017 email to [KLM] in which Mr OE forwarded his 25 August 2017 email to [HH]. [101] In his 29 September 2017 letter to Mr OE, Mr ND said (a) early termination of the sublease was not a matter in dispute, (b) the “current disputes” between [ABJ] and [KLM] did not include “the day-to-day farming of the property”...

2. [2021] NZEnvC 047 Netherlea Hobsonville Limited v Hamilton City Council [pdf, 1.7 MB]

   ...[2017] NZHC 1081. 17 Submissions of Hamilton City Council, dated 18 December 2020 at [15]. 18 Affidavit of Mr Falconer at [8]-[18]. 9 and continue operating within the zone in an efficient and effective manner. Policy 9.2.1(b) Restricting 11011 i11d11strial activity to those amillary to, S11ppo1ting or consistent Jllith industtial adivities. ( emphasis added) The proposed activity is consistent with industrial activities in t.he sense that it causes no conflict or interference w...

3. [2017] NZEmpC 33 NZ Meat Workers and Related Trades Union Inc and Anor v AFFCO NZ Ltd [pdf, 208 KB]

   ...503. a counter-factual assessment that acknowledges the consequences of wrongdoing, and not one that allows an employer to take advantage of wrongdoing. It was his contention that the counter-factual could not eliminate the breach. [101] The findings made with regard to whether a discrimination grievance is established and, if so, what remedies should be awarded, are not binding – or even applicable – to a claim of a different nature, such as a debt action brought und...

4. LCRO 240/2013 TM v DC (8 May 2017) [pdf, 365 KB]

   ...differences. The sensible and proper course for Ms DC would have been to consult with and explain to Mr TM the appropriateness or otherwise of applying for a compliance order.71 Ms DC considers that the steps she took were in Mr TM’s best interests. [101] From each party’s version of events it appears that Mr TM may not have been provided with an explanation that an ERA determination such as this was a direction to the parties to work out their differences; and that it was not...

5. [2019] NZEnvC 029 Cable Bay Wines Limited v Auckland Council [pdf, 12 MB]

   iBEFORE THE ENVIRONMENT COURT I MUA I TE KOOTI TAIAO 0 AOTEAROA Court: Hearing: Appearances: Date of Decision: Date of Issue: IN THE MATTER AND BETWEEN AND Decision No. [2019] NZEnvC 2- '1 of the Resource Management Act 1991 of an appeal pursuant to s 120 of the Act CABLE BAY WINES LIMITED & MOTUKAHA INVESTMENTS LIMITED (ENV-2018-AKL-000010) Appellants AUCKLAND COUNCIL Respondent Principal Environment Judge L J Newhook Environment Commissioner I

6. MLC 2019 April - OCR Outstanding Applicaitons [pdf, 290 KB]

   ...Application to the Chief Judge A20120015167 45/93 Mohi Wiremu Hotene CJ 2013/4 - Paratene Mita Hotene - and orders dated 1 September 1998 and 28 January 2000 at 90 WHK 405-407 and 92 WHK 250- 251 - Application to the Chief Judge A20130001014 45/93 Lynette Hatton, Jeanette Fifield CJ2013/3 - Mere Porotene – and succession orders made at 6 ADWG 312 dated 12 March 1990 - Application to the Chief Judge A20130001429 45/93 Rochel Nathan CJ 2013/6 - Richard Himiona Kuk...

7. May 2019 Outstanding Applications [pdf, 370 KB]

   ...Application to the Chief Judge A20120015167 45/93 Mohi Wiremu Hotene CJ 2013/4 - Paratene Mita Hotene - and orders dated 1 September 1998 and 28 January 2000 at 90 WHK 405-407 and 92 WHK 250- 251 - Application to the Chief Judge A20130001014 45/93 Lynette Hatton, Jeanette Fifield CJ2013/3 - Mere Porotene – and succession orders made at 6 ADWG 312 dated 12 March 1990 - Application to the Chief Judge A20130001429 45/93 Rochel Nathan CJ 2013/6 - Richard Himiona Kuk...

8. CAC 414 & 416 v Tafilipepe [2019 ] NZREADT 13 (10 May 2019) [pdf, 332 KB]

   ...breach of r 6.3. [72] Rule 6.3 provides that “a licensee must not engage in any conduct likely to bring the industry into disrepute”. Rule 6.3 was discussed briefly in the Tribunal’s decision in Jackman v Complaints Assessment Committee 10100,3 where the Tribunal approved of another Committee’s discussion of r 6.3 in Re Raos.4 In that case the Committee described conduct that would justify a finding of a breach of r 6.3 as conduct that: … if known by the public generall...

9. LCRO 57/2018 G RC and D RC v YS (30 April 2019) [pdf, 335 KB]

   ...information concerning a client, the retainer, and the client’s business and affairs acquired in the course of the professional relationship [100] The words “to protect and to hold” require positive action by lawyer to comply with the rule.30 [101] The duty of confidence is owed to “the client”. It encompasses “all information” concerning (a) the client, (b) the retainer, and (c) the client’s business and affairs “acquired in the course of a professional relation...

10. [2019] NZEmpC 73 Kazemi v Rightway Ltd [pdf, 446 KB]

    ...RightWay more than 12 months ago, it would seem to follow that RightWay accepts that all the money is now due, even though, for reasons that are not clear, no monies have been paid to Ms Kazemi. No separate remedies for breach of contract [101] The alleged breaches of contract are of: (a) an incorporated term of good faith (derived from s 4 of the Employment Relations Act); (b) an implied term that RightWay would treat Ms Kazemi reasonably and fairly; and (c) an implie...