Search Results

1. [2023] NZEmpC 168 AJY v Chief Executive of the Department of Corrections [pdf, 545 KB]

   ...embarrassment to AJY. It was clear on the evidence that the removal of computer access and the changing of the locks were not standard steps at the time. LRC’s evidence was that after leaving Prosecutions, they continued to have access to Prosecutions files within the computer system for over a year later. Mr Tukula also confirmed he had not taken such steps when COs JBW and PFD had left Prosecutions on earlier occasions. Further, to have PFD (a colleague with whom AJY had issue...

2. [2015] NZEmpC 28 Stevens v Hapag-Lloyd (NZ) Ltd [pdf, 307 KB]

   ...(NZ) LIMITED Plaintiff AND ANGELIQUE STEVENS Defendant Hearing: 21 July 2014 (evidence of Carmen Pietersen, taken before Judge Inglis); 6-8 August 2014; 24 and 28 August 2014; 4 and 11 December 2014 (further submissions filed) Appearances: E Hartdegen, counsel for plaintiff P Kiely and S Worthy, counsel for defendant Judgment: 12 March 2015 JUDGMENT OF JUDGE CHRISTINA INGLIS [1] Two challenges are before the Court. The first i...

3. 2012 to 2015 Ministry of Justice statement of intent [pdf, 962 KB]

   ...Ministry will review and reprioritise resources and services to focus on priority areas. We will know the justice system has integrity and is more responsive if: • New Zealanders have confidence in the justice system • the median time from filing to disposal of a case decreases • more people are satisfied with the quality of courts and collection services • the percentage of people who do not comply with monetary sanctions decreases • the quality of legal aid se...

4. [2017] NZEmpC 146 Yu v Zespri International Ltd [pdf, 767 KB]

   ...made for Zespri on many, but not all, of those pages. [25] For the purposes of Mr Yu’s challenge, a schedule had been prepared which provided basic information about each disputed document. From time to time, that schedule was refined and refiled by plaintiff’s counsel, as agreement was able to be reached about the disclosure of some documents. At the telephone conference just mentioned, I requested Zespri to annotate the plaintiff’s schedule, so that the Court could obta...

5. [2020] NZEmpC 230 Arachchige v Rasier New Zealand Ltd [pdf, 398 KB]

   ...BV. Costs are reserved [58] Following discussion, this proceeding was assigned Category 2B for costs purposes under the Practice Direction Guideline Scale.26 If UBER seeks costs and they cannot be agreed, the defendants may apply by memorandum filed and served by 4 pm on Friday 29 January 2021. Any response from Mr Arachchige is to be filed and 26 “Employment Court of New Zealand Practice Directions” <www.employmentcourt.govt.nz> at No 16. served with...

6. [2021] NZEnvC 001 Minister of Conservation v Northland Regional Council [pdf, 3.8 MB]

   ...resolved [5] There was a mediation on Topics 3 and 4 commencing in November 2019 as well as subsequent discussions. The parties participated and signed a settlement agreement. A Draft Order prepared by the parties to give effect to the agreement was filed with the Court as appendix 2 to their memorandum od 28 October 2020. These changes are attached as Attachment A to this decision. [6] In short, the changes agreed between the parties resolves the appeals of all parties in relatio...

7. Director of Proceedings v Taranaki District Health Board [2021] NZHRRT 49 [pdf, 613 KB]

   ...District Health Board [2021] NZHRRT 49. Note publication restrictions.] IN THE HUMAN RIGHTS REVIEW TRIBUNAL [2021] NZHRRT 49 I TE TARAIPIUNARA MANA TANGATA 2 [1] These proceedings under the Health and Disability Commissioner Act 1994 were filed on 31 March 2021. [2] Prior to the filing of the proceedings the parties resolved all matters in issue and the Tribunal is asked to make orders by consent. The parties have filed: [2.1] A Consent Memorandum dated 31 March 2021; [2.2...

8. [2021] NZEmpC 35 Radford v Chief of New Zealand Defence Force [pdf, 415 KB]

   ...proper place for the litigation is in Washington DC. Ms Radford disagreed and considered that New Zealand law applies and that she should be entitled to take action in New Zealand. [4] In response to Ms Radford’s proceedings the CDF has filed a protest to the jurisdiction of the Employment Relations Authority and subsequently the Court. The determination [5] Arising from the CDF’s protest an application was made for a question of law to be removed to the Court without the...

9. Proactive-release-OIA-review-Aug22.pdf [pdf, 30 MB]

   ...withheld in accordance with section 9(2)(a) of the OIA to protect the privacy of natural persons. Hon Andrew Little, Minister of Justice Official Information Act 1982 – report back on targeted engagement and next steps Date 27 September 2019 File reference Action sought Timeframe Discuss this briefing with officials and provide feedback on the scope and timing of a potential review of the Official Information Act 1982. At your convenience Contacts for telephone discussio...

10. [2024] NZEnvC 075 McCallum Bros Limited v Auckland Council [pdf, 12 MB]

    ...Commissioners is confirmed. B: Costs are reserved in respect of this appeal, the strike out application, the withdrawal of the midshore application, and inshore surrender/temporary offshore consent. C: Any applications for costs are to be filed within 40 working days. Any reply is to be filed within a further 20 working days. Final reply submissions, if any, are to be filed 10 working days thereafter. 3 REASONS Introduction [1] Many groups and individuals have vary...