Search Results

1. [2022] NZEmpC 232 Kang v Saena Company Ltd [pdf, 249 KB]

   ...events giving rise to the grievance. This topic was considered and resolved by the Court in its substantive judgment.14 It is not appropriate to reconsider contribution at the costs stage. [29] Turning to disbursements, these were: a. Court filing fee: $204.44 b. Translation costs: $173.02 c. Half share of interpretation costs: $1,138.50 14 Kang, above n 3, at [182]−[183]. d. Hearing fee: $500.88 TOTAL: $2,016.84 [30] In my view, these disbursements were all...

2. Wellington Standards Committee 2 v Tennet [2023] NZLCDT 20 (17 May 2023) [pdf, 105 KB]

   ...he does not suffer from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. [9] We take sympathetic notice of the many referees who spoke about his willing assistance and his skill and knowledge of criminal law. We take sympathetic notice of 2 20 April 2023, filed by Mr Tennet’s counsel. 4 reports of his generosity (for example, buying a rehabilitating client a computer to assist her with studies). We note representations from clients who express their confidence and faith in him – the t...

3. [2022] NZREADT 6 - Lawrence v REAA (11 April 2022) [pdf, 142 KB]

   ...hear and determine Mr Lawrence’s application for review of the Registrar’s determination under s 74(3) that his complaint was an inconsequential matter and need not be pursued. Licensees seek to be heard [4] On 9 February 2022, the licensees filed a Memorandum requesting the opportunity to be heard at the hearing of the review application, whether as respondents or otherwise. [5] Mr Perry, on behalf of the licensees, contends that the right to be heard is a substantive right...

4. F Ltd v DS & KS [2022] NZDT 173 (10 October 2022) [pdf, 181 KB]

   ...was aware DS and KS may have to pay more vet costs. 17. DS and KS agree that there was no agreement about whether FQ would cover any additional costs. They initially decided to cover the additional costs themselves, however, after the claim was filed against them, they decided to pursue the additional costs. 18. I find that there was no agreement between the parties that the payment of $9,541.55 was a full and final settlement of FQ’s role in Noah’s injury. Therefore, DS and KS...

5. B Ltd v R Ltd [2024] NZDT 169 (17 April 2024) [pdf, 105 KB]

   ...performance environments, to have the engine’s work assessed and repaired. NH provided a report dated 22 November 2023, gave evidence at the hearing on 17 January 2024 and provided a follow-up report dated 16 April 2024 in response to witness evidence filed by R Ltd. CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 2 of 5 5. SM acknowledged that when the vehicle was returned to R Ltd for repair after the initial rebuild, they discovered it had low oil pressure, but said this was found to be from a v...

6. [2023] NZEnvC 263 Feeley v Queenstown Lakes District Council [pdf, 1.7 MB]

   ...incorporating the confirmed Policy 24.2.1.15A as set out at [6]; (2) incorporate the new and amended provisions (excepting 24.2.1.15A) into Chs 24, 27 and Sch 24.8 as set out in Annexure 1; (3) update the planning maps as shown in Annexure 2; and (4) file a reporting memorandum as to that once completed. B: On all points of appeal in Topic 31, the appeals are allowed to the extent specified and otherwise dismissed. C: Costs are reserved, although not encouraged. Any applicati...

7. [2023] NZEmpC 235 Pact Group v Sheridan [pdf, 211 KB]

   ...defence that exceptional circumstances existed within the meaning of ss 114(4)(a) and 115(c) of the Act to allow the personal grievance claim to proceed.4 [13] By agreement, evidence relevant to this challenge was presented by relying on affidavits filed in the Authority with the exhibits removed and assembled into a common bundle of documents. Neither party sought to cross-examine witnesses and, as in the Authority, there was no disagreement about what happened. [14] A full co...

8. 2023 NZPSPLA 051 [pdf, 152 KB]

   ...Personnel and Private Investigators Act 2010 HEARD virtually on 17 August 2023 APPEARANCES Kaitlyn Petterd (no appearance) WR OP Ron McQuilter DECISION 1. This complaint is dismissed. REASONS [1] Kaitlyn Petterd filed a complaint against WR and OP, and the company they are both directors of: [redacted]. Her complaint related to the way they conducted an employment investigation of her actions on instruction by her employer in June 2023. This decision...

9. SC v CX [2024] NZDT 51 (21 February 2024) [pdf, 131 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...

10. Te Amo v Nicholas - Te Whaiti-Nui-A-Toi (2023) 306 Waiariki MB 7 (306 WAR 7) [pdf, 244 KB]

    ...contractors or invitees, from occupying the land and directing Mrs Nicholas to remove the current structure, known as the shed, from the land within a six-month timeframe. However, the issuing of final orders is delayed pending Phyllis Nicholas filing an occupation licence application with the trustees. The trustees are to convene a meeting of trustees to properly consider the application. I have directed that this process should all be completed within four months from the date of...