Search Results

1. LCRO 35/2017 QK v JF and EG (29 May 2019) [pdf, 259 KB]

   ...the intervention of the Christmas holiday break. [109] Inevitably legislation (as is the case with the Act) allows for any possible prejudice, by calculating time frames for mounting challenge to a decision issued by reference to working days. [110] To suggest, as Ms QK does, that the Committee timed the release of its decision with deliberate purpose to inconvenience her, and to suggest that timing of the release of the decisions was an abuse of process, and a deliberate attempt by...

2. LCRO 172/2015 and 173/2015 WL v XC and HF v XC (16 May 2019) [pdf, 269 KB]

   ...[109] The partners of M partnership applied to strike out Ms XC’s second amended statement of claim. The High Court’s judgement in relation to that application was the first of the three in which Ms XC’s pleadings were strongly criticised. [110] Faire AJ was highly critical of the second amended statement of claim, signalling that it lacked particularisation and cautioning against simple repetition in a subsequent pleading.18 I have referred above at [46]–[49] to His Honour...

3. [2021] NZEnvC 007 JJ Limited v Dunedin City Council [pdf, 246 KB]

   JJ LIMITED V DUNEDIN CITY COUNCIL BEFORE THE ENVIRONMENT COURT AT CHRISTCHURCH I MUA I TE KŌTI TAIAO O AOTEAROA KI ŌTAUTAHI Decision No. [2021] NZEnvC 7 IN THE MATTER of the Resource Management Act 1991 AND of an appeal under s 120 of the Act BETWEEN JJ LIMITED (ENV-2019-CHC-112) Appellant AND DUNEDIN CITY COUNCIL Respondent Court: Environment Judge J E Borthwick Environment Commissioner D J Bunting Hearing: at Dunedin on 24 November 2020 Appearances:

4. LCRO 2/2018 MC v TL (17 June 2020) [pdf, 304 KB]

   ...capability”. He said it had taken Mr MC “months” to return the affidavit so the matter “can’t be as urgent” as Mr MC was “now” saying. He asked if it was true, as told by New Zealand Post, that Mr MC had complained to New Zealand Post. [110] On 1 June Mr MC told Mr TL the “matter is and was always urgent”. He said he would have been “appreciat[ive]” if his matter “could have been dealt with …quickly”. He said he had “just needed some sound advice...

5. Hoete v Faulkner - Motiti North C No 1 Block (2017) 136 Waikato Maniapoto MB 278 (136 WMN 278) [pdf, 302 KB]

   136 Waikato Maniapoto MB 278 IN THE MĀORI LAND COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WAIKATO MANIAPOTO DISTRICT A20160002463 UNDER Section 19(1)(a) of Te Ture Whenua Māori Act 1993 IN THE MATTER OF MOTITI NORTH C NO 1 BLOCK BETWEEN GRAHAM HOETE AND AUBREY HOETE Applicants AND LIZA FAULKNER Respondent A20160003646 UNDER Section 289 of Te Ture Whenua Māori Act 1993 IN THE MATTER OF MOTITI NORTH C NO 1 BLOCK BETWEEN MARY FAULK

6. [2018] NZEnvC 190 Jacks Point v Queesntown Lakes District Council [pdf, 7.1 MB]

   BEFORE THE ENVIRONMENT COURT I MUA I TE KOOTI TAIAO 0 AOTEAROA Court: IN THE MATTER AND BETWEEN AND Decision No. [20181 NZEnvC 1'10 of the Resource Management Act 1991 of appeals pursuant to clause 14(1) of the First Schedule of the Act MT CHRISTINA L TO (ENV-2018-CHC-103) REMARKABLES PARK LIMITED (ENV-2018-CHC-126) JACKS POINT RESIDENTIAL NO.2 LTD & OTHERS (ENV-2018-CHC-137) GLENDHU BAY TRUSTEES L TO (ENV-2018-CHC-141 ) Appellants QUEENSTOWN LAK

7. Cook v Manawatu Community Law Centre [2021] NZHRRT 10 [pdf, 261 KB]

   ...employee, from seeking information from WINZ about Ms Cook, (without any updated privacy consent) in July 2016 and March 2017 or from doing, as an employee, acts of that description. The onus is on MCLC to prove this, on the balance of probabilities. [110] Ms Herbert said that as she was unaware of the requests of 8 July 2016 and March 2017 she could not take any steps to stop them. Lack of knowledge is not a relevant matter, as PA, s 126(1) applies whether or not the employer had knowl...

8. [2020] NZEmpC 109 McCook v Chief Executive of the Inland Revenue Department [pdf, 333 KB]

   ...not accepted that the representees have the same interest in the matter which is before the Court, as do the plaintiffs. [109] It is common ground that r 4.24 of the HCR applies in the Employment Court by virtue of reg 6 of the Regulations. [110] That rule states: 4.24 Persons having same interest One or more persons may sue or be sued on behalf of, or for the benefit of, all persons with the same interest in the subject matter of a proceeding − (a) with the consent of t...

9. [2020] NZEmpC 62 Gibson-Smith v Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment [pdf, 388 KB]

   ...Gibson-Smith’s particular circumstances evolved, I am not satisfied that either the later job descriptions, or the practice, applied to him in this respect. Issue two: status of the 2008 discussions between Mr Gibson-Smith and Mr Bloomfield [110] As indicated earlier, the key question on the second issue is whether the understanding reached in 2008 between Mr Gibson-Smith and Mr Bloomfield was a condition of employment only which could cease to have effect at any time, or whether...

10. [2019] NZEmpC 98 Noble v Ballooning Canterbury.com Ltd [pdf, 565 KB]

    ROBERT NOBLE v BALLOONING CANTERBURY.COM LIMITED [2019] NZEmpC 98 [19 August 2019] IN THE EMPLOYMENT COURT OF NEW ZEALAND CHRISTCHURCH I TE KŌTI TAKE MAHI O AOTEAROA ŌTAUTAHI [2019] NZEmpC 98 EMPC 85/2018 IN THE MATTER OF a challenge to a determination of the Employment Relations Authority BETWEEN ROBERT NOBLE Plaintiff AND BALLOONING CANTERBURY.COM LIMITED Defendant Hearing: 15 and 16 April 2019 (Heard in Ch