Search Results

1. [2013] NZEmpC 38 Taiapa v Te Runanga O Turanganui A Kiwa Trust t/a Turanga Ararau Private Training Establishment [pdf, 117 KB]

   ...Employment Relations Authority BETWEEN BRUCE TAIAPA Plaintiff AND TE RUNANGA O TURANGANUI A KIWA TRUST T/A TURANGA ARARAU PRIVATE TRAINING ESTABLISHMENT Defendant Hearing: 25 and 26 February 2013 And by written submissions filed on 4 and 6 March 2013 (Heard at Gisborne) Appearances: Gregory Bennett, advocate for plaintiff Elizabeth Inger, counsel for defendant Judgment: 18 March 2013 JUDGMENT OF CHIEF JUDGE G L COLGAN [1] This is a challenge...

2. Murphy & Anor v CAC301 & Anor [2015] NZREADT 44 [pdf, 171 KB]

   ...make a pre-auction offer. 9. My recollection is that I listened to the message after the open home whilst I was in my car. Unfortunately I was unable to return it, as it was from a blocked number.” [24] We observe that the brief of evidence filed for the licensee on about 17 April 2015 seems to be the first time that there has been reference to such a blocked telephone call or that any such explanation has been provided by the licensee. [25] In her evidence-in-chief, the license...

3. [2013] NZEmpC 106 Pacific Flight Catering Ltd v Service and Food Workers Union [pdf, 160 KB]

   ...leaves remaining the issue of costs in respect of the challenge to this Court. Costs will normally follow the event. Costs are reserved. If the matter of costs cannot be resolved between the parties, then the defendants shall have 14 days to file a memorandum as to any costs sought and the plaintiffs shall have 14 days thereafter to file any memorandum in answer. ME Perkins Judge Judgment signed at 4.15 pm on Friday 7 June 2013...

4. [2014] NZEmpC 173 Lund South Ltd v Low [pdf, 151 KB]

   ...to determine the scope of all remaining issues which arise from the pleadings following determination of the preliminary issue. [63] Mr Low is entitled to costs. If the parties are unable to reach agreement as to costs, Mr Low is to file a memorandum and evidence within 21 days, and LSL is to file a memorandum and evidence 21 days thereafter. B A Corkill Judge Judgment signed at 9.45 am on 18 September 2014...

5. CAC20006 v Stevenson [2013] NZREADT 56 [pdf, 76 KB]

   ...Gallacher: Q “So it’s okay to falsify that?”. Mr Stevenson: A “Yeah it was just fooling around in the office yeah”. Mr Gallacher: Q “Fooling around in the office? okay. Mr Stevenson: A “Wasn’t even supposed to go into the files. I don’t know how it got in there cause Tracy Beer works with me you see and that document which has got a commission thing on it was never used by me for commission. I didn’t even know it was in the official file actually so I c...

6. Pue v Tapatu - Okawa A1B (2011) 268 Aotea MB 93 (268 AOT 93) [pdf, 165 KB]

   ...[55] The Applicants have prevailed in this proceeding, while noting the Respondents’ lack of engagement. It is customary for this Court to follow the orthodox practice and order costs following the event. 26 [56] Mr Takarangi is invited to file submissions on costs within 30 days. Once in receipt of those submissions, a copy will be sent to the Respondents for their reply within a further 30 days. Following that I will consider the parties’ submissions before making a final...

7. Director of Proceedings (EFG) v Commissioner Police [2012] NZHRRT 8 [pdf, 87 KB]

   ...referred to as EFG. As this is the second time in which he has been 2 the complainant in proceedings before the Tribunal, the intituling has been amended to distinguish these second proceedings from the first. [3] No evidence yet having been filed by the parties the narrative which follows has been taken from such pleadings and submissions as there are and from the Tribunal’s first decision. The narrative must be read with this proviso in mind. Background [4] In 2002 EFG au...

8. LCRO 001/2017 AB v AC [pdf, 253 KB]

   ...prohibits a lawyer from engaging in misleading or deceptive conduct “on any aspect of the lawyer’s practice” did not apply. 2 At [8]–[13]. 5 Application for review [17] Mr AB filed an application for review on 4 January 2017. He seeks: (a) a written apology from Mr AC to Mrs AB; (b) payment of $5,000 by Mr AC to a charity nominated by Mr and Mrs AB; and (c) attendance by Mr AC “(physically, not online) [at]...

9. Auckland Standards Committee v Stirling [2010] NZLCDT 4 [pdf, 224 KB]

   ...subdivision being developed in various stages, out of Auckland. One partner in the firm had been entirely responsible for this client with the assistance of a qualified legal executive who effectively had the day to day running and management of the files relating to sales of properties in the subdivision. Some hundreds of agreements were involved. In 2004 that partner retired from the firm. However the arrangement with the firm was that he would continue as a consultant to the f...

10. 4 Auckland Standards Committee v Stirling 2010 NZLCDT [pdf, 224 KB]

    ...subdivision being developed in various stages, out of Auckland. One partner in the firm had been entirely responsible for this client with the assistance of a qualified legal executive who effectively had the day to day running and management of the files relating to sales of properties in the subdivision. Some hundreds of agreements were involved. In 2004 that partner retired from the firm. However the arrangement with the firm was that he would continue as a consultant to the f...