Search Results

1. [2008] Waikato DHB & ors v New Zealand PSA Inc AC 6/08 [pdf, 53 KB]

   ...oral summaries limited to advice of wage rates and other important changed terms and conditions, at the other extreme. Background [4] The following are taken from what appear to be common elements of the parties’ chronologies and the documents filed. [5] While collective bargaining with the four plaintiff district health boards (“the Midland DHBs”) for a multi-employer collective agreement (“meca”) covering PSA members in allied health positions at those boards was under...

2. [2008] Ryan Security & Consulting (Otago) Ltd v Bolton [Full Court (Chief Judge Colgan, Judges Shaw and Couch) CC 11/08 [pdf, 49 KB]

   ...sequestration. [35] Another provision of the Labour Relations Act which appears not to have been fully considered in the NZ Railways case was s208 which provided: 208. Enforcement of order ⎯ Any order made under section 207 of this Act may be filed in any District Court, and shall then be enforceable in the same manner as an order made or judgment given by the last mentioned Court. [36] In the decision, s208 was described as a “debt collecting” provision but it is clearly of...

3. LCRO 33/2015 HS v Area Standards Committee [pdf, 193 KB]

   ...conduct pursuant to s 12(c) of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 (the Act).5 [29] By way of penalty the Committee fined Mr HS $5,000 and ordered him to pay costs of $2,000 to the New Zealand Law Society. Application for review [30] Mr HS filed an application for review on 9 February 2015. In summary, Mr HS disagrees with the Committee’s conclusions regarding: (a) his motivation for making the complaints; (b) the effect those complaints would have had on Mr M and the partn...

4. [2017] EmpC 158 Car Haulaways Ltd v First Union Inc [pdf, 282 KB]

   ...application was heard part way through the period in respect of which the notice of strike had been issued. The defendant was served with a copy of the proceeding, but was placed at a disadvantage because it did not have the opportunity to file evidence. However, Mr Cranney, as experienced counsel, was able to address all the issues involved. Accordingly, I granted urgency. Interim injunction tests [21] The factors that the Court must take into account in considering whet...

5. Canterbury Westland Standards Committee No. 1 v Grave [2016] NZLCDT 8 [pdf, 62 KB]

   ...background and where there was considerable exchange of information between counsel and constructive discussions between counsel in advance of the hearing. As a result of the information provided to the Standards Committee, both through the affidavits filed by Mr Grave and preliminary negotiations, Mr Shaw, for the Standards Committee, was able to clearly state to the Tribunal that there was no question of dishonest intent to be advanced. Mr Shaw did not dispute that, apart from...

6. DG v YT Ltd [2014] NZDT 566 (19 May 2014) [pdf, 157 KB]

   ...of the policy excludes cover in these circumstances. However, the DGs consider that, despite clause 4, s11 of the Insurance Law Reform Act 1977 entitles them to cover on the grounds that BB’s breach was not the cause of the loss. [4] The DGs filed a claim seeking an order that they be indemnified under their policy. The parties agreed to extend the jurisdiction of the Tribunal to $20,000.00 to enable the dispute to be heard. Issues [5] By virtue of section 11 of the Insuranc...

7. Connell v Standing [2012] NZIACDT 46 (30 August 2012) [pdf, 109 KB]

   ...and has not refunded them. [7] Mr Standing was notified by the Tribunal that the evidence in support of the complaint could justify the complaint being upheld. He was asked under the Tribunal’s statutory powers to provide information from his files, and answer questions. He did not do so, and has not been compelled as the information before the Tribunal is sufficient to uphold the complaint without further evidence. [8] The Tribunal has upheld the complaint. The evidence supporting...

8. Waitangi Tribunal - Kaupapa Inquiry Programme Direction [pdf, 476 KB]

   ...arise, or narrowed where claimants do not wish to bring their claims before the Tribunal. 4. For each issue or set of issues, claims will be grouped for joint inquiry. An inquiry will proceed to hearing once sufficient evidence to proceed has been filed, the issues for inquiry determined and the parties have confirmed their readiness to proceed. The inquiry process will be flexible and responsive, for example to facilitate the early hearing of claimant oral evidence or a staging of the i...

9. Canterbury Westland Standards Committee 2 v Withers [2013] NZLCDT 54 [pdf, 242 KB]

   ...had advised numerous practitioners on such matters over the years. [11] Mr Withers had committed himself to a coaching programme designed by Mr Mackintosh. This programme, it was said, concentrated on effective client communication, good file management, and appropriate time management. [12] As part of the programme, Mr Mackintosh was said to be “schooling” Mr Withers in relation to the identification of conflicts of interest and the taking of steps to avoid such confl...

10. Roberts - Okoroire 457N1 Maori Reservation (2016) 141 Waiariki MB 134 (141 WAR 134) [pdf, 228 KB]

    ...elected trustees, 6 the Court received the applicant’s objections to the appointment of Ms Gail Hamilton and Mr Grant Mahirahi Thompson. [10] Ms Roberts also requested that two nominations deemed invalid, one for lateness and the other for being filed incorrectly, be reconsidered. At the hearing I declined to do so. The call for nominations and the election process had been over-cautiously notified 5 123 Waiariki MB 281-287 (...