Search Results

1. Auckland Standards Committee 4 v Shand [2021] NZLCDT 9 (31 March 2021) [pdf, 108 KB]

   ...DATE OF DECISION 31 March 2021 COUNSEL Ms S Earl for the Auckland Standards Committee Ms S Cameron for the Practitioner 2 DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL RE LIABILITY AND PENALTY Introduction [1] Mr Shand failed to provide his file when requested to do so by the Standards Committee and he continued that failure for 18 months despite further urging. He accepts a finding of unsatisfactory conduct. The Standards Committee does not argue that he should be found liable...

2. Director of Human Rights Proceedings v Slater (Adjournment) [2014] NZHRRT 53 [pdf, 48 KB]

   ...12 March 2014 a Minute was issued that day directing Mr Slater to provide certain particulars by 11 April 2014 2 with the Director’s evidence to follow on 13 June 2014. Mr Slater’s own written statements of evidence were required to be filed by 11 July 2014. [3] Because Mr Slater did not provide the particulars as ordered, a second teleconference was convened on 7 August 2014. Mr Slater agreed to file the requested particulars by 19 August 2014. The timetable was reset. Th...

3. [2021] NZEmpC 107 Smartlift Systems Ltd v Armstrong [pdf, 224 KB]

   ...The company challenged the procedural findings made against it and the extent of remedies awarded. 2 Armstrong v Smartlift Systems Ltd [2019] NZERA 592 (Member van Keulen). [8] The proceedings in the Court started life when Smartlift filed its statement of claim on 13 November 2019; on the same day it applied for a stay of proceedings, which if granted would prevent enforcement of the monetary orders made by the Authority. An amended application was filed on 19 Novembe...

4. EC COVID-19 Protocol - All Alert Levels 6 September 2021 [pdf, 160 KB]

   ...the Court’s Twitter account to enable those with an interest to contact the Registry if need be. 6. Updates will be sent out via the Court’s Twitter account (@EmploymentCourt). The Court’s webpage is being updated regularly. 7. All filing of Court documents in any region which is subject to Level 4 restrictions is to be by email or using File and Pay.1 If a party does not have the ability to file electronically, mail will still be checked periodically. However, becaus...

5. Koloni v Accident Compensation Corporation (Late filing to the District Court) [2025] NZACC 153 (22 September 2025) [pdf, 154 KB]

   ...Koloni’s application for weekly compensation. [2] On 17 July 2025, Judge Henare issued an Initial Minute which directed that Ms Koloni formally apply by 31 July 2025 for leave to file the appeal out of time and set out the reasons why the appeal was filed late. 2 [3] On 28 August 2025, Ms Koloni submitted that the appeal was filed late because there has been a delay in receiving any communication from the Corporation, including a new decision, and so did not expect that s...

6. Brown v Otago Polytechnic (Strike-Out Application) [2014] NZHRRT 22 [pdf, 96 KB]

   ...supported by Mr VE Scott as McKenzie friend Mr BCS Dorking for Otago Polytechnic DATE OF HEARING: 19 and 20 May 2014 DATE OF DECISION: 30 May 2014 DECISION OF TRIBUNAL ON STRIKE OUT APPLICATION [1] On 16 August 2013 Otago Polytechnic filed an application for an order that these proceedings be struck out. In this decision we explain why the application succeeds in part and fails in part. Background [2] On 11 July 2012 Mr Brown made a complaint to the Human Rights Com...

7. LCRO 124/2017 RG v XP (4 December 2018) [pdf, 250 KB]

   ...suggesting mediation and asking for any injunction application by Mr XP to be on notice. [5] Three months later Mr XP’S lawyers applied without notice for an interim injunction to freeze funds under Ms XP’S control. The Memorandum Ms SL filed in 2 support of that application included references to the supporting evidence, and the following: 19. [Mr XP] and [Ms XP] separated on December [date], 2015: para 2. And then at: 55. [Mr XP] is aware [Ms XP] has solicitors, and...

8. [2022] NZIACDT 5 – LS v Murthy (4 April 2022) [pdf, 199 KB]

   ...complainant provided the coloured marksheet documents to Ms A sometime between June and early August 2020. Ms Murthy was not aware of this until the telephone call on 18 August. She did not authorise Ms A, who was not her employee, to access her client files; 4. states that the EOI had been prepared and was ready for filing around the first week of July. The complainant was requested to pay Immigration NZ’s fee of $530, but he did not do so. The EOI was therefore not filed....

9. Chand v Shearer [2016] NZIACDT 12 (18 March 2016) [pdf, 84 KB]

   ...Advisers Authority referred this complaint to the Tribunal. The complaint is that Ms Shearer did not file a request for a visa for some three months after getting instructions to do so. She misled her client, and her client’s employer, saying she had filed the request when that was not true. The complaint is that Ms Shearer was negligent in the delay in filing the request, and engaged in dishonest and misleading behaviour. [2] Ms Shearer accepted the grounds of complaint, and explained...

10. [2015] NZEmpC 106 Nisha v LSG Sky Chefs New Zealand Ltd [pdf, 94 KB]

    ...106 [7 July 2015] IN THE EMPLOYMENT COURT AUCKLAND [2015] NZEmpC 106 ARC 22/14 IN THE MATTER OF a challenge to a determination of the Employment Relations Authority AND IN THE MATTER of an application for leave to file interlocutory applications BETWEEN SHABEENA SHAREEN NISHA (NISHA ALIM) Plaintiff AND LSG SKY CHEFS NEW ZEALAND LIMITED Defendant Hearing: By written submissions filed on 25 and 30 June 2015 Appear...