Search Results

1. Notes on High Court Appeal Process January 2025.pdf [pdf, 138 KB]

   ...the Authority [16] The usual process will be that when a case on appeal is lodged, the Authority will review it, and identify whether it appears to comply. If not, it will identify why it does not appear to comply and provide an opportunity to file a case on appeal that does comply. [17] If the first draft or a subsequent draft appears to comply, it will be referred to the other party for comment. You can reply to those comments, and the Authority will make a decision as to whethe...

2. GI v D Ltd [2024] NZDT 452 (27 June 2024) [pdf, 197 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...

3. CI v KH Ltd [2024] NZDT 486 (18 June 2024) [pdf, 198 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 have...

4. Q Ltd v N Ltd [2024] NZDT 883 (18 December 2024) [pdf, 203 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 $260 filing fee for an appeal. You can only appeal outside of 20 working days if you have...

5. [2025] NZEmpC 128 Isher Enterprises Ltd v Arushi [pdf, 243 KB]

   ...sums. [7] In total, the plaintiffs have been ordered to pay the defendant $148,299.02 (including costs). The first and third plaintiffs have also been ordered to each pay a penalty of $5,600 into the Crown bank account.5 [8] The plaintiffs have filed a de novo challenge to the Authority’s determinations and also seek a stay over the sums ordered to be paid. Legal framework [9] A challenge does not operate as a stay of proceedings on a determination of the Authority.6 That...

6. Research on the effectiveness of police practice in reducing residential burglary part 7: case study of Sydenham Local Police Area [pdf, 337 KB]

   ...conducted bail and curfew checks but often sought to develop a more general rapport with the young person, rather than take a simple punitive approach. There needed to be sufficient staff in order to have a realistic and workable ratio of officers to youth files. In 2003, the District instigated Operation Profile, which resulted in 1082 DNA samples being collected. In 2004, SOCO reported an increase in the number of ‘hits’. 13 Victim-focused initiatives Sydenham Police sent letters...

7. [2011] NZEmpC 69 Zhang v Sam's Fukuyama Food Service [pdf, 53 KB]

   ...ARC 46/10 IN THE MATTER OF a challenge to a determination of the Employment Relations Authority BETWEEN JIAN ZHANG Plaintiff AND SAM'S FUKUYAMA FOOD SERVICE LTD Defendant Hearing: (in response to memoranda filed on 9 and 31 May 2011) Appearances: Gary Pollak, counsel for the plaintiff Tony Kurta, advocate for the defendant Judgment: 23 June 2011 COSTS JUDGMENT OF JUDGE A D FORD [1] In my substantive judgment 1 dated 30 March 201...

8. [2010] NZEmpC 53 Mars NZ Ltd v MCWU & anor [pdf, 15 KB]

   ...MATTER OF an application for costs BETWEEN MARS NEW ZEALAND LIMITED Plaintiff AND MANUFACTURING AND CONSTRUCTION WORKERS UNION INC First Defendant AND SIMON BOOTH AND OTHERS Second Defendants Hearing: by memoranda of submissions filed on 14 and 28 April 2010 Judgment: 11 May 2010 COSTS JUDGMENT OF CHIEF JUDGE GL COLGAN [1] On 25 February 2010 the plaintiff applied to the Court for an urgent hearing of its application for interlocutory injunction to re...

9. [2010] NZEmpC 92 Industrial Services Ltd v Koning [pdf, 15 KB]

   ...delays by ISL, which meant that the matter did not come to a speedy resolution, were deliberate acts to exploit Mr Koning’s weaker position and therefore ISL did not act throughout the process in good faith. ISL advised that it would not be filing submissions in relation to the Authority’s good faith report. Decision [8] I must decide, on the basis of the report and the comments of the parties, whether ISL did not participate in the Authority’s investigation of...

10. Director of Proceedings v Taikura Trust [2012] NZHRRT 3 [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:...