Search Results

1. [2016] NZEmpC 105 Caffe Coffee (NZ) Ltd v Farrimond [pdf, 124 KB]

   ...basis that to qualify as a recoverable disbursement, a payment must be both necessary to the conduct of the proceeding and reasonable. 34 [54] Caffe Coffee seeks allowance for the issuing of the statement of problem in the Authority, when a filing fee of $71.56 was paid. It also seeks filing fees in the Employment Court totalling $306.66 and hearing fees of $1,502.64 are sought. These fees were necessarily incurred; I adopt the same approach as adopted when assessing costs, an...

2. [2016] NZEmpC 109 Dotcom v Orduna [pdf, 148 KB]

   ...Employment Relations Authority AND BETWEEN KIM DOTCOM Plaintiff AND PANIFILO J ORDUNA JR First Defendant AND JOHN RYAN TACTAQUIN Second Defendant Hearing: 22 August 2016 (in Chambers) and by submissions filed on 24 August 2016 (Heard at Auckland) Appearances: E Telle and M Pollak, counsel for individual parties S Cogan and H Enright, counsel for K Dotcom Judgment: 26 August 2016 INTERLOCUTORY JUDGMENT OF CHIEF JU...

3. [2016] NZEmpC 137 Bennett and Others v Michaels and Others [pdf, 179 KB]

   ...is accepted. [2] In the proceedings before the Court, as in the Authority proceedings, the plaintiffs (Katherine Bennett, Frank van Geems and Samsuri Zainol) have named Mr Sean Michaels and his three companies as defendants. In one document filed in the proceedings a further person was named as second defendant. That was done without any application for leave and it is accepted that he was mistakenly named and should not be a defendant in the challenge. He was not a party to or...

4. Smith v Smith - Nuki o Te Hapū Tahawai ki Rataroa Whānau Trust [2019] Māori Appellate Court MB 110 (2019 APPEAL 110) [pdf, 332 KB]

   ...receive notice of the risk of removal by the Court? (e) Should the order appointing replacement trustees stand? [6] Prior to the hearing, the appellant sought to adduce further evidence. We declined that application on the basis that the material filed was available at the time of the original hearing and should have been presented then.2 Background [7] Ngā Uri o Ngāti Pakahi Trust was created over Mangaiti 1A1 on 12 December 1991 per s 438 of the Māori Affairs Act 1953.3 Cur...

5. [2019] NZEnvC 074 Hanoi Vietnam Cafe v City Rail Link Limited [pdf, 6.5 MB]

   ...having entered in appearance at the commencement of the hearing, these parties took no further part. [7] Accordingly, the hearing focussed on the appeal by HAVIE. 3 The appeal by HAVIE [8] Represented by its proprietor Ms L A Tran, HAVIE filed a 39 page appeal with attachments, that the Court and the other parties could follow only with great difficulty.1 [9] While outright rejection of the requirement for amendment was not expressly sought in the appeal, the six items of reli...

6. Taueki v Horowhenua 11 (Lake) Māori Reservation Trust [pdf, 296 KB]

   ...Appellate Court MB 653 Introduction [1] On 24 June 2016, we dismissed the appeal by Vivienne Taueki. On 17 July 2019, we ordered Ms Taueki to pay costs of $15,000.00 to the second respondent, Horizons.1 [2] Counsel for Ms Taueki subsequently filed an application to recall the costs decision. We determined that:2 (a) There was a factual error in the costs decision as we failed to take into account that Ms Taueki was in receipt of special aid; and (b) We would rehear and r...

7. [2020] NZEnvC 014 Bay of Plenty Regional Council v Ziwi Limited [pdf, 7.7 MB]

   ...submission to the Regional Council , and the requirements of the resource consent application referred to in Order 1 (h) prior to its lodgement. 4. The terms of these orders can later be varied by the Court on an application to the Court and/or by the filing of a consent memorandum by both parties . 5. Leave is to be granted to the First Respondent to apply to the Court for cancelling the enforcement orders, in the event that the Regional Council consents to such cancellation, or...

8. [2020] NZREADT 21 - Hanford (12 May 2020) [pdf, 181 KB]

   ...14 February 2020, the parties advised the Tribunal that Mr Hanford would plead guilty to the alternative charge under s 73(c)(iii) of the Act, and that the Committee would withdraw the charge under s 73(a). An Agreed Statement of Facts has been filed. [3] Although an oral hearing was scheduled for this matter, the parties subsequently agreed that the Tribunal would consider it on the papers. Facts [4] At all relevant times the defendant, Mr Hanford, was a licensed salesperson

9. [2022] NZREADT 22 — QQ v REAA (CAC 1902) & NQ (25 October 2022) [pdf, 171 KB]

   ...property should best be presented for sale. The Committee regarded the licensee’s advice as standard in the circumstances. [20] The appellant had also contended that he was wrongly blamed by the licensee for delaying the selling process by filing a complaint with the Authority. The Committee found no evidence that the licensee was a party to any such accusations against the appellant. Furthermore, the appellant alleged that he was blamed for delays in the settlement of the pr...

10. [2024] NZREADT 07 - NF v REAA and Cho (21 March 2024) [pdf, 143 KB]

    ...of Tab 6 of the Authority’s bundle. 7 Email former solicitor to the Authority (28 February 2022), at Tab 4 of the Authority’s bundle. 8 Complaint (30 April 2021) at 9 and 11 of the Authority’s bundle. 4 Appeal [11] The appellant filed an appeal (form dated 6 July 2022) against the Committee’s decision of 22 June 2022. It is apparent from his undated statement (filed in the Tribunal on 11 August 2023) that the appeal is also against the penalty decision of 21 February...