19427 items matching your search terms
...Employment Relations Act 2000 and this judgment stands in its place. 24 EMPC 132/2016. [72] Costs are reserved. If they are not agreed between the parties, the Labour Inspector may file a memorandum relating to costs by 31 January 2017 and Tech 5 may have until 15 February 2017 to respond. K G Smith Judge (for the full Court) Judgment signed at 8.35 am on 16 December 2016
...require steps to comply to be completed no later than 9 August 2018; and (e) the improvement notice, as varied, is confirmed. [87] The costs of and incidental to this proceeding are reserved. If the Inspector intends to apply for costs he must file a memorandum within 15 working days. Smiths City has a further 15 working days to reply. No order of costs will be made in favour of the intervenor. K G Smith Judge for the Full Court Judgment signe...
...14 in Samuels v Chief Executive of the Ministry of Social Development [2006] NZFLR 223 (HC) which also considered s 70B and the issue of primary responsibility for the care of children. These decisions were included in the bundle of authorities filed at the hearing by the Crown. See: Re SSA 132/11 [2012] NZSSAA 41; Re SSA111/11 [2012] NZSSAA 44; Re SSA 17/14 [2014] NZSSAA 44; Re SSA 34/14 [2014] NZSSAA 92; Re SSA 160/14 [2015] NZSSAA 34; Re SSA 1/15 [2015] NZSSAA 30. Mr Nixon sub...
...court is mindful that the lapse question has been brought forward in the interests of greater procedural efficiency. Further, we record that we were ably assisted by all counsel in their submissions. However, any applications for costs must be filed within ten days of the date of this decision, and any reply within a further five working days. [75J The Case Manager will contact the parties to make arrangements for a judicial teleconference to discuss the status of the appeals and ma...
...CP24134 AUCKLAND 1569 2 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 My full name is Peter Noel Kensington. 1.2 My evidence is given on behalf of the Auckland Council (the Council) in its regulatory capacity in relation to the direct referral application filed by Panuku Development Auckland Limited (the Applicant) seeking resource consents for the construction, occupation, use and maintenance of permanent and temporary infrastructure and undertaking of activities within the coastal marine ar...
...on 17 November 2015. 3 The issue of whether the Court had the ability to make the declaration as sought by the applicant was raised. At the conclusion of the conference I adjourned the case for hearing in December. I also directed counsel to file written submissions on the jurisdictional issue. [8] A hearing was held on 16 December 2015 to receive further submissions on the jurisdictional point. 4 Counsel for the applicant maintained that the Court has the ability to make the...
...preliminary oral findings on key jurisdictional differences early in the hearing. [7] Related directions were tested with the parties and were made in the Record dated 19 June and Minute dated 21 June 2018. Those included directions as to the prior filing of synopses of submissions on the jurisdictional issues. Partial quote With interpolations 4 The appellant's submissions [9] The appellant notes that the "primary outstanding issue" between the parties concer...
...$10,000. b) Mr Haika’s s 123(1)(c)(i) award is reduced to $8,000. [129] I reserve costs. The parties should attempt to resolve this issue within 21 days. If they are unable to do so, either party may apply for costs. Any response is to be filed within 21 days thereafter. B A Corkill Judge Judgment signed at 2.45 pm on 7 May 2021
...for allowing two awards of costs for two matters heard at the same review hearing. Accordingly, the appellant’s application for further costs is refused. [95] Should there be any issue relating to costs on this appeal, counsel have leave to file memoranda in respect thereof. Judge C J McGuire District Court Judge Solicitors: P Sara, Barrister and Solicitor, Dunedin for the appellant Young Hunter, Christchurch for the respondent 6 Sutton, above...
...down for hearing. A Notice of Hearing was sent to the Practitioner on 25 September 2018. 53. A hearing was convened on 3 October 2018. At the hearing, the Committee realised that the Practitioner had not been provided with several documents on the file. The hearing was therefore adjourned. The Practitioner was advised of the adjournment and sent the outstanding documents on 4 October 2018. 54. No further submissions were received from the Practitioner. On 9 October 2018, the hearing r...