Search Results

1. Koopu v Trustees of Maraenui A2 Ahu Whenua Trust – Maraenui A2 (2013) 69 Waiariki MB 115 (69 WAR 115) [pdf, 141 KB]

   ...comprising 170.4232 hectares, was leased to Mr Erueti Koopu. He utilised this block for his dairy farm. It is situated on State Highway 35 approximately 49 kilometres south-east of Opotiki. [2] The costs issue before me has arisen from the applications filed with the Court on 23 January 2012 and 20 April 2012 by the applicant. Mr Koopu filed these applications under ss 19, 18, 20 and 21 of Te Ture Whenua Act 1993 (the Act). [3] The Court made an order pursuant to s 19 on 25 January...

2. WHT Claims under $20k - Chair's Directions [pdf, 174 KB]

   ...only be able to be represented by a lawyer with the leave of the Tribunal. . 2.5 The Member of the Tribunal assigned to the claim will give a written decision, including reasons, within 15 working days of either:  the receipt of the reply filed by the claimant, or  the expiry of the time limit in which such a reply should be made if no reply is filed, or  the date of the hearing in claims where a hearing is required. 2.6 The Tribunal will provide a copy of the decisi...

3. Marshall & McCardle [2011] NZWHT Auckland 5 [pdf, 89 KB]

   ...lodged a claim with the Department of Building and Housing. The Chief Executive of the Department of Building and Housing has concluded that the claim is not an eligible claim because the house was built more than ten years before the claim was filed. Mr Marshall and Ms McCardle 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 determ...

4. Owners of 52 Aitken Terrace [2012] NZWHT Auckland 40 [pdf, 89 KB]

   ...[1] Shelley Wright, as the representative of the owners of the complex at 52 Aitken Terrace, Kingsland has applied to review the eligibility decision of the chief executive in relation to their multi unit complex claim. On 20 December 2011 they filed an application for an assessor’s report with the Department of Building and Housing. The assessor and the chief executive concluded that the claim was not an eligible claim because it was not filed within ten years of when the comp...

5. JK v RQ LCRO 174 / 2011 (19 March 2012) [pdf, 75 KB]

   ...they could not be taken into account in the relationship property proceeding. He had analysed L’s bank statements and come to the view that the sum of $200,000.00 was unaccounted for. The information was included in the Applicant’s affidavit filed in the Court, but the claim was not accepted by the Judge who had said, “Evidence of missing money is evidence of nothing.” 2 Complaints [4] The Applicant considered that the Practitioner was responsible for his...

6. [2020] NZEmpC 179 TPT Forests Ltd v Penfold [pdf, 169 KB]

   ...previously employed both respondents. [2] TPT now makes application for search orders in relation to the respondents. [3] In addition to the application and supporting documents, including an undertaking as to damages and affidavits, TPT has filed a draft search order and a draft statement of problem, which it proposes filing with the Employment Relations Authority (the Authority) if the search orders are granted and after they have been executed. [4] The Court has jur...

7. 2020-12-02 Minute Final Timetable and Expert Conferencing Directions [pdf, 138 KB]

   ...are required to give notice by the time indicated in Attachment B. [16] Unless leave is granted by the court, cross-examination of witnesses by each party is not to exceed 30 minutes. Any application for leave to exceed this limit is to be filed 10 working days before the hearing commences, giving reasons. [17] Note: the court will ask its questions of the witnesses prior to cross-examination. ______________________________ J E Borthwick Environment Judge Issued:...

8. [2015] NZEmpC 226 Sheath v The Selwyn Foundation [pdf, 86 KB]

   ...a determination involving the same parties to the present application. 1 In that determination, Ms Pamela Sheath’s claims to wage arrears and a personal grievance for unjustified disadvantage were dismissed. Costs were reserved. Ms Sheath filed a challenge against that determination in the Court, which is filed under EMPC 154/2015. That challenge is yet to be heard. 1 Sheath v The Selwyn Foundation [2015] NZERA Auckland 134...

9. WQ v Emberson [2019] NZIACDT 39 Sanctions (14 June 2019) [pdf, 102 KB]

   ...documents from the complainant and from others such as the New Zealand Qualifications Authority. In doing so, Ms Emberson was slow to respond to a number of queries from the complainant. [5] By late September 2016, the application had still not been filed, but Ms Emberson formally stopped working at the law firm. However, she continued to assist the replacement employee with various files, including that of the complainant. She also continued to communicate using the firm’s e...

10. [2021] NZEmpC 16 Bowen v Bank of New Zealand [pdf, 184 KB]

    ...picked up on mentions in Ms Daly’s affidavit and taken the opportunity to introduce new and detailed evidence, including substantial exhibits. Parts of affidavit to be excluded [19] While I do not accept that the BNZ has unreasonably delayed filing its application to exclude evidence, I have taken into account the point made by Mr O’Brien, for Ms Bowen, that orders at this stage would not allow time for Ms Bowen to file an amended affidavit. [20] In those circumstances,...