Search Results

1. Greenslade v Commissioner of Police (Consolidation Order) [2019] NZHRRT 10 [pdf, 224 KB]

   ...1 [This decision is to be cited as Greenslade v Commissioner of Police (Consolidation Order) [2019] NZHRRT 10.] 2 Background [1] Mr Greenslade has brought two proceedings against the Commissioner of Police: [1.1] In HRRT049/2017 (filed on 11 September 2017), Mr Greenslade alleges a breach of the Human Rights Act 1993. He claims to have been discriminated against on the grounds of disability. [1.2] In HRRT003/2018 (filed on 23 January 2018), Mr Greenslade alleges a br...

2. [2019] NZEmpC 51 Goleman Wellington Cleaning Ltd v Nicolle [pdf, 330 KB]

   ...his financial difficulties. Mr Fuimaono’s affidavit went no further. Whatever was said, it is not apparent if it was intended to be about Mr Nicolle’s personal finances or those of his new business. [7] Mr Sanders, counsel for Mr Nicolle, filed a memorandum in response to this application. That memorandum was unhelpful, making only two comments. First, Mr Nicolle did not consent to or oppose Goleman’s application. Second, Mr Sanders

3. [2018] NZEnvC 150 Aquastar Holdings Ltd v Kawerau District Council [pdf, 2 MB]

   ...paying its rates, the Council submits that this is minimal and does not in any reflect the fact that it is Aquastar's actions that have forced the Council to commence enforcement proceedings. [6] In support of its application, the Council has filed an affidavit from Karen Maree Wilson, affirmed on 26 June 2018 and attaching invoices for legal costs totaling $9,199.42 (GST inclusive), as well as letters dated 15 November 2017 and 22 January 2018 headed "Without prejudice sa...

4. Findlay v Auckland City Council [pdf, 92 KB]

   SUMMARY Case: Findlay & Anor v Auckland City Council & Anor File No: TRI 2008-100-000034/ DBH 03882 Court: WHT Adjudicator: KD Kilgour Date of Decision: 9 September 2009 Background The claimants are the trustees of the Lee Findlay Family Trust governed solely by one of the trustees, Mr Findlay. His co-trustee, Mr Sandelin did not take part in this claim. Mr Findlay sought damages to compensate the cost of remedial work he undertook and general damages against th...

5. HRRT Statement of Reply (Privacy) [pdf, 236 KB]

   ...__________________________________________________________________________ THE HUMAN RIGHTS REVIEW TRIBUNAL Statement of Reply When to use this form Use this form if you are named as a defendant in a ‘Statement of Claim’ under section 98 of the Privacy Act 2020 and wish to file a ‘Statement of Reply’ in response to the allegations made against you. Completing this form • Print clearly in CAPITALS. Use a black pen or blue pen when completing this form. • Please file fo...

6. Enforcement of an access direction - reply (s104) [pdf, 215 KB]

   ...HUMAN RIGHTS REVIEW TRIBUNAL Enforcement of access direction - Reply When to use this form Use this form if you are named as a defendant in an application for an access order under section 104 of the Privacy Act 2020 and you wish to file a Reply in response to the application. Completing this form • Print clearly in CAPITALS. Use a black pen or blue pen when completing this form. • Please file four physical copies of this ‘Reply’, by posting or by handing them in...

7. [2020] NZEmpC 130 Tolson v Potter [pdf, 188 KB]

   ...claimed. [3] The steps and amount of time allocated to those steps pursuant to Band B are as follows: Item Proceedings Days 2 Commencement of defence to challenge by defendant 1.5 11 Preparation for first directions conference 0.4 12 Filing memorandum for subsequent directions conference 0.8 (0.4 x 2) 13 Appearance at first or subsequent directions conference 0.4 (0.2 x 2) 36 Defendant’s preparation of affidavits 2 38 Defendant’s preparation of...

8. [2019] NZEmpC 89 Martinsen v Target International (NZ) Ltd [pdf, 218 KB]

   ...Relations Act 2000, ss 101(ab), 143(b). 9 Morgan v Whanganui College Board of Trustees, above n 2, at [27]. [18] Accordingly, paragraph 32 of the statement of claim is struck out. An amended statement of claim omitting that paragraph is to be filed and served by Mr Martinsen within 10 working days of this judgment. Target may wish to file and serve a statement of defence to the amended statement of claim, but that is not required. [19] Costs are reserved. J...

9. [2019] NZEmpC 128 Horizon Concepts Ltd v Hayward [pdf, 318 KB]

   ...of an investigation meeting. That is the amount claimed because the investigation lasted for one day. [5] A claim of $500 is made for the costs of preparing the application for costs. [6] The claimed disbursements sought are made up of Court filing fees of $204.44, the Authority removal application fee of $153.33 and $3,820 for the expense incurred in paying Mr Somerville for his attendances to give evidence. 1 Hayward v Horiz...

10. [2020] NZEmpC 67 Maddigan v Director-General of Conservation [pdf, 312 KB]

    ...that is not a factor that can be taken into account in setting costs on his challenge to the Court. [5] I accordingly decline Mr Maddigan’s application for a contribution of $2,500 towards his costs. Mr Maddigan is, however, entitled to the filing and hearing fees on his challenge. These should be paid by the defendant in full within a period of 14 days of the date of this judgment. [6] Mr Maddigan asks for an order that he be paid out his accrued long service leave (equi...