Search Results

1. O Ltd v TO [2023] NZDT 341 (24 May 2023) [pdf, 169 KB]

   ...named the wrong party, and amended the respondent name on her claim to the correct EO (who has a [Suburb] address). 3. O Ltd wished to pursue its counter-claim for costs, so TO’s claim has been separated and will be given a new CIV-number and file so that it can be heard at another date and time once the correct EO has been notified of the claim against him. 4. With respect to O Ltd’s claim for costs, section 43 of the Disputes Tribunals Act 1988 bars the award of costs relati...

2. Auckland Standards Committee 3 v Tabb [2025] NZLCDT 7 (19 February 2025) [pdf, 112 KB]

   ...that this case is comparable with that of Lester1 where the practitioner undertook a great deal of debt collecting work and failed to advance a case and failed to inform her client in a timely manner. There were additional shortcomings on other files in Lester. Ms Lester admitted misconduct and four charges of unsatisfactory conduct in addition to a charge under s 241(c). She accepted responsibility and was censured, fined $7,500 and ordered to pay costs of around $30,000. [8]...

3. FINAL-2025-International-surrogacy-protocol.pdf [pdf, 93 KB]

   ...urging reform in this area. The Adoption Act 1955 permits adoption applications to be considered by the Court when the applicants and the child/children are not physically in New Zealand. Amendments to the Family Court Rules now permit electronic filing of applications and the use of remote hearings if directed by a judge. The court registries are now equipped to enable remote hearings. The protocol This protocol aims to provide a framework to secure legal parenthood for childr...

4. [2025] NZEmpC 74 Locke v Rishworth Aviation Asia Pacific Limited (Interlocutory judgment (No 2) [pdf, 161 KB]

   ...April 2025 INTERLOCUTORY JUDGMENT (NO 2) OF JUDGE KATHRYN BECK (Application to set aside appearance) [1] This judgment resolves an application by the plaintiff, Gregory Locke, to set aside an appearance under protest to jurisdiction filed by the proposed second defendant, Korean Air Lines Co., Ltd (KAL). [2] On 22 July 2019 Mr Locke was engaged by the defendant, Rishworth Aviation Asia Pacific Ltd (Rishworth), as an airline pilot. Under his contract with Rishworth,...

5. DX v CT [2024] NZDT 834 (8 October 2024) [pdf, 93 KB]

   ...of the Disputes Tribunal hearing there is no jurisdiction for the District Court to reach a finding different to that of the Referee. A Notice of Appeal may be obtained from the Ministry of Justice, Disputes Tribunal website. The Notice must be filed at the District Court of which the Tribunal that made the decision is a division, within 20 working days of the decision having been made. There is a $200 filing fee for an appeal. You can only appeal outside of 20 working days if you hav...

6. [2025] NZEmpC 59 healthAlliance NZ Limited v Cunningham [pdf, 157 KB]

   ...person Judgment: 26 March 2025 INTERLOCUTORY JUDGMENT JUDGE M S KING (Application for urgency) [1] This judgment resolves an application for urgency brought by the plaintiff, healthAlliance NZ Ltd. healthAlliance has filed a statement of claim pursuant to s 140(6) of the Employment Relations Act 2000 (the Act) alleging that the defendant, Garth Cunningham, is in breach of compliance orders. healthAlliance seeks relief in the form of: (a) a stay bein...

7. BX & EX v HT [2025] NZDT 17 (7 February 2025) [pdf, 117 KB]

   ...$2,900.00 on or before 7 March 2025. Reason 1. On 5 September 2024 BX and EX [for brevity further reference will be to BX only] issued notice pursuant to the Fencing Act 1978 for replacement of the 6m portion of a fence the parties share. BX filed a claim seeking payment of $4,067.66 saying HT has not responded to the notice. HT says he did not receive the notice. 2. The issues to decide are whether the notice was issued correctly and whether it sufficiently complied with the req...

8. Recusal Guidelines

   ...reaching a decision of the case.  The standard for recusal is one of “real and not remote possibility”, rather than probability. Process Judges will need to address questions of potential recusal.  Such questions will usually arise when a file is allocated to a particular Judge for pre-trial preparation and ultimate hearing and decision.  At this point, Judges have a responsibility to familiarise themselves with relevant parts of the court file as it then stands to conside...

   Located in:

   1. Employment Court >
   2. Information & guidance

9. Domestic Violence 1995 Act 42-day rule & Children, Young Persons and their Families Act 1989 60-day rule [pdf, 81 KB]

   ...complication of DV proceedings by other issues, usually custody and access, was another common reason for delay. Negotiations leading to alternative resolutions were also common in the experience of those interviewed for this research. Delays in the filing of evidence were reported in a number of areas. Most informants agreed that the longest delays occurred when other matters, usually custody and access, were being addressed in conjunction with the defence of an application for a protection o...

10. [2016] NZEmpC 166 Alim v Sky Chefs NZ Ltd [pdf, 537 KB]

    ...NISHA (NISHA ALIM) Plaintiff AND LSG SKY CHEFS NEW ZEALAND LIMITED First Defendant AND PRI FLIGHT CATERING LIMITED Second Defendant AND TERRY HAY Third Defendant Hearing: 25 August 2016 (and on papers filed subsequently: application heard at Auckland) Appearances: M O'Brien, counsel for Ms Alim until 18 November 2016 N Taefi, counsel for Ms Alim from 21 November 2016 C Meechan QC and J Douglas, counsel for LSG Sky Chefs...