Search Results

1. [2024] NZEmpC 226 Glenfield College BOT & Ors v Anderson [pdf, 365 KB]

   ...large part caused by the fact that two full investigations had to be undertaken by the Authority, through no fault of either party. Regrettably one of the key witnesses for the plaintiff passed away prior to this hearing. His brief of evidence, filed in the Authority in both investigations, was admitted by consent.3 [5] This is a de novo challenge and the Court must reach its own decision after hearing the claim afresh. I have however reached the same overall conclusions as t...

2. Directory of Official Information Search Tool

   ...oversee aspects of and carry out the functions relating to the registration system the code of ethics and the complaints and disciplinary process within the engineering profession in new zealand specifically correspondence and general administration files minutes of meetings and associated support material appeal decisions financial information annual report statement of intent and statement of objectives operating protocol established as a body corporate under the chartered professional engi...

   Located in:

   1. About >
   2. Directory of Official Information

3. [2009] NZEmpC CC 8/09 Safe Air Ltd v Walker [pdf, 56 KB]

   ...determination dated 22 June 2009 (CA 86/09), the Employment Relations Authority concluded that Mr Walker had been unjustifiably dismissed and, together with other remedies, ordered that he be reinstated to his former position. By a statement of claim filed on 29 June 2009, Safe Air challenged the whole of that determination. [2] Safe Air sought a stay of the order for reinstatement pending a decision of its substantive challenge but that was refused by the Authority (CA 86A/09). I...

4. CAC 10036 v Hume [2011] NZREADT 37 [pdf, 142 KB]

   ...[32] We invite submissions from counsel on penalty. The CAC are to file their submissions within 10 days of the date of this decision and Mr Hume 10 days after receipt of the CAC’s submissions. Any comments by the CAC strictly in reply may be filed 2 days after receipt of Mr Hume’s response. [33] In accordance with s 113 of the Act the Tribunal advises the parties of the right to appeal this decision to the High Court pursuant to s 116 of the Act. DATED at WELLINGTON this 7th...

5. The Māori Trustee v O'Rorke - Pukekohatu 7B (2014) 329 Aotea MB 79 (329 AOT 79) [pdf, 308 KB]

   ...greg.shaw@tetumupaeroa.co.nz Peter Bulfin, Halliwells Lawyers. DX NA 96004, Hawera. Taranaki preston.bulfin@halliwells.co.nz mailto:greg.shaw@tetumupaeroa.co.nz 329 Aotea MB 80 Introduction [1] This decision concerns a number of applications filed by the Māori Trustee on 4 February 2010 over Pukekohatu 7B. These applications are the latest in a series of proceedings commencing in 2003 where Judge Spencer secured broad agreement to the exclusive occupation of an area of...

6. Pouwhare v Auld - Oparau No 1 Block and Pirongia West 12B3D (2015) 95 Waikato Maniapoto MB 167 (95 WMN 167) [pdf, 270 KB]

   ...Waikato Maniapoto MB 168 Introduction [1] On 30 October 2003 Judge Milroy heard two applications concerning the Oparau No 1 Block (“the Oparau Block”) and the Pirongia West 12B3D Block (“the Pirongia Block”). The applications had been filed by the then trustees of the Oparau Block, a block of Māori freehold land. [2] In one application 1 the trustees sought to obtain a legal right of way across the Pirongia Block. At all relevant times the Pirongia Block was and rem...

7. AI v Secretary for Justice 10 August 2012 NZRA 000012 [pdf, 83 KB]

   ...than settlement negotiations. 28. He annexed as Appendix 1 a chart detailing the process for claims to the Waitangi Tribunal. The chart sets out fifteen steps that are taken in reaching resolution of a claim. Nine of those steps relate to the filing and hearing of the claim and the tenth relates to the Tribunal issuing its report on the claim(s). The remaining five steps relate to negotiations towards settlement following the release of the report. 29. The Secretary’s submissio...

8. [2016] NZEmpC 13 Adams t/a Untouchable Hair & Skin v Brown [pdf, 171 KB]

   ...event. It is necessary for the Court to determine the correct amount which they should receive as a contribution to their costs since no time or other records are available. Attendances included participation in a directions telephone conference, filing and serving of a notice of opposition (no evidence was filed for Mr and Mrs Adams for the purposes of the application), and the provision of detailed submissions. [55] Having regard to the extent of those attendances I conclude tha...

9. CAC 20007 v Marshall [2013] NZREADT 101 [pdf, 145 KB]

   ...started with Property Brokers. [26] On 29 April 2013 Mr Fisher provided a report in which he concluded there were $6,708 of suspected expenses and $5,258 very likely not genuine. That would be a total loss to the company of $11,966. Affidavits Filed for Prosecution [27] A number of affidavits have been filed detailing the offending referred to in the above charge against the defendant. It is only necessary to refer to the detail contained in the affidavit of Mr Fisher who complete...

10. [2014] NZEmpC 236 Lyttelton Port Co Ltd v Rail Maritime Transport Union Inc [pdf, 119 KB]

    ...action is justified on the grounds of safety or health. [2] The matter has been dealt with under conditions of considerable urgency. The proceeding, which included the application for an interim injunction and an application for urgency, was filed late on Saturday, 20 December 2014. Initially, LPC sought a decision from the Court that evening so as to restrain what was asserted to be an unlawful strike which would take effect from midnight, 20 December 2014 to 6.00 am, 2...