Search Results

1. AB v IJ, OBO and EF LCRO 203/2014 (29 August 2016) [pdf, 312 KB]

   ...letter of complaint4 Mr [IJ] says he attended an appointment at [Law Firm A] with his wife and [EF] in February 2013 where they spoke with Ms [AB] and Ms [MN]. It is acknowledged by all parties that Ms [MN] was the person primarily engaged on this file working under the supervision of Ms [AB]. Although there is a difference between Mr [IJ]’s recall of the date when he met with Ms [AB] and Ms [MN], and the file notes and statements made by Ms [AB], it is accepted and acknowledged b...

2. [2020] NZEnvC 126 Beresford v Queenstown Lakes District Council [pdf, 334 KB]

   ...self-evidently not pose any prejudice for the appellant. As such, I am satisfied the prerequisite for waiver in s281, that waiver will not unduly prejudice any party, is satisfied. [16] The Attorney gives the following explanation for the lateness in filing the notice:12 Given the slow process of identifying the intended beneficiaries, and the limited hui and participation of those identified to date, the Attorney needed to be satisfied that joining was in the interests of...

3. INZ (Calder) v Ji [2019] NZIACDT 50 (19 July 2019) [pdf, 246 KB]

   ...information was not through recklessness or ill-intent on the part of Mr Ji. However, the incident had been a significant wake-up call to Mr Ji and as a result he had initiated changes in the working relationship with Globe. It was contended that filing a warning would be a disproportionate and unfair response. [43] Immigration New Zealand replied to Mr Laurent on 19 April 2016. It agreed there was no evidence confirming Mr Ji knew the information was false when it was lodged,...

4. Puna v Puna - Rotopounamu 1B1A [2022] Chief Judges MB 28 (2022 CJ 28) [pdf, 335 KB]

   ...Judge W W Isaac Copies to: Copies to: C Bennett, PO Box 446, Napier, cara@Langleytwigg.co.nz 2022 Chief Judge’s MB 29 Hei tīmatanga kōrero Introduction [1] Te Roera Tareha Puna (“the applicant”) filed this application pursuant to s 45 of Te Ture Whenua Māori Act 1993. The applicant seeks to amend an order made at 5 RGTK MB 52 on 16 December 1983 which vested the interests of Te Paea Tiaho Bartlett in Rotopounamu 1B1A solely in Pao...

5. Sawyer v Victoria University of Wellington (Strike Out) [2024] NZHRRT 9 [pdf, 260 KB]

   ...Wellington [2018] NZEmpC 71, (Settlement Agreement decision), in relation to the settlement agreement dated 24 July 2014 between Dr Sawyer and Victoria University of Wellington also apply in these proceedings. 3 [7] In August 2016 Dr Sawyer filed this claim. She attached a Certificate of Investigation from the Privacy Commissioner dated 31 May 2016. The Commissioner’s certificate stated that only IPP 6 was applied. It noted that no interference with Dr Sawyer’s privacy nor...

6. [2006] NZEmpC AC 53A/06 Graham v Crestline Pty Ltd [pdf, 26 KB]

   ...OF a challenge to a determination of the Employment Relations Authority AND IN THE MATTER OF an application for costs BETWEEN DONALD MONTROSE GRAHAM Plaintiff AND CRESTLINE PTY LIMITED Defendant Hearing: By memoranda of submissions filed on 20 October and 8 November 2006 Judgment: 21 November 2006 COSTS JUDGMENT OF CHIEF JUDGE GL COLGAN [1] Crestline Pty Limited as the successful party asks that it be awarded costs of $26,577.84 together with disbursements...

7. Unnikrishnan v Goldsmith [2015] NZIACDT 26 (13 March 2015) [pdf, 80 KB]

   ...Registrar: K England, Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment, Auckland. Complainant: In person. Adviser: S Laurent, Laurent Law, Auckland. Date Issued: 13 March 2015 2 DECISION The issue [1] The Registrar filed a statement of complaint dated 25 November 2014. Through her counsel Ms Goldsmith responded with an application to dismiss the complaint on the grounds: [1.1] The Statement of Complaint does not comply with the Tribunal’s practice note.

8. [2014] NZEmpC 156 Rolling Thunder Motor Company Ltd v Kennedy [pdf, 60 KB]

   ...[8] The matter was then set down for a five-day hearing, to commence on 16 July 2012. Shortly before the hearing, it was necessary for the trial Judge to issue a minute indicating that it was apparent, from the briefs of evidence which had been filed, that documents were now being relied on which had not previously been disclosed, despite previous directions from the Court to that effect. [9] This resulted in a substantial quantity of additional evidence, including documents bei...

9. [2014] NZEmpC 9 Gunning v Bankrupt Vehicle Sales and Finance Ltd [pdf, 30 KB]

   ...gave my substantive decision in this matter on 28 November 2013.1 [2] The manner in which this case was heard was unusual. Before the Authority, the defendant was represented by counsel. In response to the plaintiff’s challenge, the defendant filed a statement of defence but did not attend the hearing on 18 November 2013. Rather, by agreement, counsel for the defendant filed submissions. An affidavit of the defendant’s director was also filed. The plaintiff was largely su...

10. Body Corporate 85760 Acme Apartments [2011] NZWHT Auckland 4 [pdf, 86 KB]

    ...Halley Lane, Te Aro. The assessor and the Chief Executive of the Department of Building and Housing have concluded that the claim in relation to this complex is not an eligible claim because it was built more than ten years before the claim was filed. The claimants have applied for reconsideration of the Chief Executive’s decision under section 49 of the Weathertight Homes Resolution Services Act 2006 (the Act). The Issues [2] The key issues to be determined in this cas...