Search Results

1. Singh v McKee [2024] NZHRRT 3 [pdf, 259 KB]

   ...as his complaint against another staff member was treated differently to how complaints by other staff members were treated. Mr McKee also denies this claim and says that as it arises from the same circumstances that form part of a claim Mr Singh filed in the Employment Relations Authority (ERA), s 79A of the HRA applies and the Tribunal has no jurisdiction to hear it. ISSUES [5] The issues the Tribunal must determine are: [5.1] Whether Mr McKee subjected Mr Singh to racial...

2. Te Manutukutuku 80 [pdf, 13 MB]

   ...kaupapa panel released Kāinga Kore on Māori homelessness. While this report is now with the Govern ment, the inquiry is preparing for the main part of its hearing programme in 2024. The Tribunal has also commenced an urgent inquiry into claims filed con­ cerning kura kaupapa Māori and cur­ rent Crown education policy affecting them. Hearings for this inquiry took place over April and May and were conducted bilingually, with all of the claimants’ evidence and submissions bein...

3. Brown v Accident Compensation Corporation (Cover Issues) [2023] NZACC 23 [pdf, 280 KB]

   ...foraminal region. The left foraminal annular tear is visible on both scans, as is the right foraminal annular tear. [34] ACC issued its decision again on 12 September 2016, declining elective surgery funding. [35] A further review application was filed by the appellant. [36] Mr Hodgson provided a further report dated 28 September 2016. [37] Mr Hodgson said: I have read the reports by Dr Quentin Reeves and the report by Mr Peter Hunter for the CAP for ACC. It appears Dr Reev...

4. [2024] NZEnvC 166 Scaife v Queenstown Lakes District Council [pdf, 3 MB]

   ...Topic 38, subtopic 2 – Rural Visitor Zone, dated 22 November 2023. 3 with a resulting Joint Witness Statement (‘JWS’) prepared by those experts. The JWS included amended PDP provisions. Supplementary closing submissions were also filed and considered by the court. [5] In its final decision issued on 15 May 20243 the court confirmed the JWS provisions as being the most appropriate, except where specified otherwise. QLDC was directed to provide a final version of all pr...

5. [2023] NZEnvC 174 Barbican Securities Limited v Auckland Council [pdf, 292 KB]

   ..._______________________________________________________________ DECISION OF THE ENVIRONMENT COURT _______________________________________________________________ A. The appeal is declined. B. Costs are reserved. Any application for costs is to be filed within 10 2 working days and any response within five working days of receipt of any application. REASONS Introduction [1] This appeal concerns a proposed three-lot subdivision located at 134 Linwood Road, within the...

6. Stryder v Accident Compensation Corporation (Weekly Compensation) [2024] NZACC 68 [pdf, 285 KB]

   ...period was determined under its own merits. This means that the calculation of weekly compensation was based on the role you held at this date of accident. I have asked our Technical Specialists and Clinical Advisor to consider the information on file and determine if you have received the correct amount of week!y compensation over this period across both claims. They have confirmed that the cessation of weekly compensation under claim R2466719429 on 31/10/2004 was correct. They...

7. People with finalised charges and convicted of psychoactive substances December 2023 [xlsx, 99 KB]

   ...total number of people each year. Reasons for people having unknown ethnicity include it not being recorded by Police or it not being transferred to the Ministry of Justice from the prosecuting agency (eg Police). This is usually due to the charge being filed by summons (rather than arrest). Some offence types (such as traffic offences) are more likely to be charged by summons. Charges prosecuted by agencies other than Police, Crown Law or Corrections (eg Inland Revenue, Ministry of Social Deve...

8. Clay v Accident Compensation Corporation (Personal Injury) [2024] NZACC 91 [pdf, 283 KB]

   ...condition was no longer the result of his personal injury of 16 August 2018, but was due to a pre- existing degenerative change. Mr Clay lodged an application for review of this decision. [13] On 26 February 2020 an ACC18 medical certificate was filed by Mr Clay’s GP, Dr Tamer Gamaleledin, adding an additional diagnosis of “non-compressive disc protrusion” due to the accident of 16 August 2018. [14] On 19 March 2020, Dr Pai provided a supplementary report: The findings as...

9. LCRO 76/2024 QM v BY (13 December 2024) [pdf, 240 KB]

   ...followed, on 2 August 2024 the parties were given an opportunity to make submissions as to whether they wished the review application to proceed by way of a hearing in person, or a hearing on the papers. They were informed that any submissions were to be filed by no later than 4pm on 16 August 2024. [46] In an email to the Case Manager also dated 2 August 2024, BY said that he agreed to the review application being dealt with on the papers. 9 [47] QM advised the Case Manager on 6...

10. Tatana v Accident Compensation Corporation [2025] NZACC 52 (26 March 2025) [pdf, 284 KB]

    ...[17] Having considered the available evidence, the Reviewer concluded there was not sufficient evidence to support a finding that Ms Tatana’s meniscus tear and MCL partial tear were caused by the accident on 19 August 2022. [18] Ms Tatana filed a notice of appeal from this decision on 28 March 2024. Further evidence on appeal [19] Orthopaedic Surgeon and Lower Limb Specialist, Mr Julian Stoddart, was instructed by Ms Tatana’s solicitor to provide expert evidence. In his repo...