Search Results

1. B Ltd v C Ltd & others [2024] NZDT 99 (21 February 2024) [pdf, 213 KB]

   ...between $37,774.00 and $49,422.00. B Ltd seeks an order that C Ltd is liable to pay it $30,000.00 (which is limit of the jurisdiction of the Tribunal). 3. C Ltd was removed from the Register of Companies with effect from 1 May 2023. This claim was filed on 17 March 2023. At the first hearing of the claim the claim was struck out because C Ltd had been removed from the Register of Companies. The previous Referee granted a rehearing of the claim after evidence was provided that C Ltd was...

2. [2024] NZIACDT 15 – YT v CX (14 May 2024) [pdf, 290 KB]

   ...sent an employment contract to the complainant. He was to be employed as a fitter welder by an engineering company (the employer). He signed it on 30 September 2022. [7] On about 13 October 2022, the complainant’s work visa application was filed with Immigration New Zealand (Immigration NZ). 3 [8] Immigration NZ approved the work visa on 25 January 2023, for a period of three years. The complainant was required to work as a fitter welder for the specified employer....

3. Hawkins v New Zealand Police [2024] NZHRRT 8 [pdf, 258 KB]

   (1) ORDER PREVENTING PUBLICATION OF NAME, ADDRESS AND IDENTIFYING DETAILS OF COMPLAINANT REFERRED TO IN THIS PROCEEDING (2) ORDER PREVENTING SEARCH OF THE TRIBUNAL FILE WITHOUT LEAVE OF THE TRIBUNAL OR OF THE CHAIRPERSON DECISION OF TRIBUNAL1 [1] After Mr Hawkins was alleged to have harassed a certain person (the complainant), New Zealand Police (Police) came to Mr Hawkins’ house on 20 May 2022 and delivered 1 [This decision is to be cited as Hawkins v New Zealand Police [2...

4. LCRO 8/2022 QQ v LW (8 October 2024) [pdf, 227 KB]

   ...[49] Mr QQ infers that the reference to r 2 and its subrules relates to the passage in Mr LW’ letter where the direct contact with Mr FM “leaves open the serious allegation that the lawyer and his client wrote the letter conspiring to defeat a filed proceeding”.27 [50] Mr QQ says that this allegation “seems to assert that when a communication that endeavours to compromise a proceeding, usually by settlement, is sent directly to a party then it is akin to blackmail”.28 [51] M...

5. [2025] NZEmpC 10  DQJ v The Commissioner of Inland Revenue [pdf, 267 KB]

   ...CHIEF JUDGE CHRISTINA INGLIS Introduction [1] The plaintiff worked at the Department of Inland Revenue for approximately 18 months. Their employment was brought to an end on what was expressed to be a “no faults” basis. The plaintiff filed a personal grievance claiming unjustified dismissal and unjustified disadvantage; reinstatement (along with other relief) is sought on the substantive claim in the Employment Relations Authority (the Authority). The plaintiff sought...

6. ENV-2016-AKL-000206 Cato Bolam Consultants Limited v Auckland Council [pdf, 10 MB]

   ...original and 1 copy of any section 274 notice with the Court, and a direction instead that anyone seeking to join the appeal as a section 274 party may, as an alternative to complying with the usual requirements of section 274 and Form 33, be allowed to file an electronic copy of any section 274 notices by email to the Court's dedicated email address for section 156 appeals (unitaryplan@justice.govt.nz), which may be signed or unsigned, in which case no hard copy need be filed with...

7. [2010] NZEmpC 139 Jinkinson v Oceana Gold (NZ) Ltd [pdf, 14 KB]

   ...dismissal down to the date of her reinstatement, less three months’ wages. [2] On 24 August 2010, the defendant made application to the Court of Appeal for leave to appeal that order for reimbursement of lost wages. [3] The defendant has now filed an application for stay of execution of my order for reimbursement of lost wages. That application is opposed. The application and 1 [2010] NZEmpC 102 notice of opposition s...

8. [2010] NZEmpC 69 Minhinnick v NZ Steel Ltd [pdf, 15 KB]

   ...MATTER OF a challenge to determination of the Employment Relations Authority AND IN THE MATTER OF an application for costs BETWEEN WILSON MINHINNICK Plaintiff AND NEW ZEALAND STEEL LIMITED Defendant Hearing: By memoranda from counsel filed on 9 April and 12 May 2010 Judgment: 27 May 2010 COSTS JUDGMENT OF JUDGE M E PERKINS [1] Mr Minhinnick commenced a challenge in this Court against the determination of the Employment Relations Authority (the Authority) date...

9. Rafiq v Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (Costs) [2013] NZHRRT 32 [pdf, 36 KB]

   ...solicitor. The matter was not referred to the Crown Law Office or to any external counsel. Accordingly no external expenses have been incurred by the Ministry. [3] Nevertheless substantial preparation was required from the time the proceedings were filed by Mr Rafiq. The Ministry submits that an award of costs of $5,000 (GST inclusive) is appropriate and represents a reasonable contribution to the Ministry’s legal costs. [4] No submissions have been filed by Mr Rafiq in response t...

10. Director of Proceedings v Aranui Home & Hospital [2012] NZHRRT 4 [pdf, 37 KB]

    ...the Director of Proceedings sought a final order prohibiting the publication of the name, occupation and identifying details of the aggrieved person. 2 [3] The plaintiff and defendant have since settled the proceedings and on 6 March 2012 filed with the Tribunal the following documents on a consent basis: [3.1] Joint Memorandum of Counsel Seeking Declaration dated 17 February 2012. [3.2] Agreed Summary of Facts. [4] The Joint Memorandum of Counsel is in the following terms:...