Search Results

1. [2018] NZEmpC 20 Smith v Director General of the Ministry for Primary Industries [pdf, 282 KB]

   ...explanation by the employer. Two Air New Zealand stewards were charged jointly with smuggling a video cassette recorder. One of the stewards was acquitted but the other was convicted. The steward who was acquitted was subsequently convicted on a guilty plea of being in possession of uncustomed goods.5 [43] The case never reached the stage where the employer was required to explain, because the circumstances of each employee were different. One was not a party to smuggling whereas...

2. Apaapa - Te Pura No 17 Block (2010) 6 Waikato Maniapoto MB 1 (6 WMN 1) [pdf, 207 KB]

   ...approve the amount requested of $140,000.00 even against general land. [36] The applicants gave evidence reconfirming much of the earlier information and evidence put before the Court at the first two hearings. [37] Mr Apaapa, in an impassioned plea to the Court, indicated that as a result of the property being rented for a number of years it is in a state of disrepair. He indicated that he is in considerable financial difficulty having lost jobs, lost an ACC benefit and simply c...

3. RN v QW LCRO 226/2012 (8 September 2016) [pdf, 97 KB]

   ...compensation, $25,000. The review application is dated 31 July 2012, at which time Mr RN had not secured judgment by default against the TLs. Since then, his drive for compensation has abated and the thrust of his review application turned to a plea that harsher penalties should be imposed on Mr QW. [82] As the review progressed, Mr RN’s concerns expanded, became more personal and increasingly serious. The process of review is not the place to air concerns about a practitioner’...

4. [2021] NZIACDT 4 - SL v Mackintosh (4 March 2021) [pdf, 271 KB]

   ...looked at while the reconsideration application was being processed. She would now resubmit all the information in one package. [58] Further documents were sent by the complainant to Ms Mackintosh by email on the same day at 2:48 pm, with a plea to file the s 61 request as soon as possible. Section 61 application filed 10 June 2019 [59] On the same day, 10 June 2019, Ms Mackintosh made another application to Immigration New Zealand on behalf of the complainant under s 61 for a...

5. {2017] NZEmpC 15 Spotless Facility Services NZ Ltd v Mackay [pdf, 143 KB]

   ...way: 21 Although s 34 does not go so far as to provide a statutory exception to the obligations of the Tribunal to act fairly (s 88(3)) in accordance with the rules of natural justice, its objective is clearly to ensure that the rigidities of pleading do not prevent it from determining cases of personal grievance according to their merits rather than by reference to the way in which they have been expressed before or even during the hearing. The section contemplates its use by...

6. Hohepa v Banks - Waima C30A [2019] Māori Appellate Court MB 629 (2019 APPEAL 629) [pdf, 442 KB]

   ...determination of the tenancy”.12 6 Stephen Todd (gen ed) Todd on Tort (8th ed Thomson Reuters, Wellington 2019. 7 At 9.2.02. 8 At 9.2.02, footnote 6. 9 Ellis and Loftus Iron Co (1874) LR 10 CP 10 (Comm Pleas) at 12. 10 See for example Cousins v Wilson [1994] 1 NZLR 463 (HC) ($25 awarded); Dehn v Attorney-General [1988] 2 NZLR 564 (HC) ($1 awarded); Zondag v Zondag HC Hamilton CIV-2003-419-328, 19 June 2007 ($1 awarded); Ogle v Aitken...

7. Impact of S24A of the Sentencing Act on Reoffending [pdf, 289 KB]

   ...courts are proactive in promoting restorative justice. 10. The amendment introduced a requirement that all eligible cases be adjourned to consider whether restorative justice would be appropriate prior to sentencing. The criteria include a guilty plea, at least one identifiable victim, restorative justice has not been used before in that case, the case is before the District Court, and the registrar informs the court that an appropriate restorative justice process can be accessed. 11...

8. LCRO 118/2018 VT v MQ (18 March 2020) [pdf, 157 KB]

   ...of your matter we will keep your file for at least seven years from completion and thereafter we will destroy it. You are welcome to uplift the information on your file to which you are entitled, provided that all fees and costs have been paid. Please give us reasonable notice before collecting your file should you wish to do so. [8] Also, on 14 October 2015, Ms MQ visited the property and met with Mr VT and Mr RH. [9] On 19 October 2015, Mr RH sent Ms MQ the following email: Hi...

9. LCRO 181/2017 FW and KP v BG (31 October 2019) [pdf, 173 KB]

   ...copyright issue, namely, use of the NZIA form which is reserved to NZIA Practices, with the functions or tasks of the person appointed to the role of architect described in the NZIA form. [84] In its statement of claim, the contractor included the plea, in effect, that because [Firm B] was not a NZIA Practice, its appointment as successor architect was invalid. Therefore, because there was no architect appointed, no payment schedule had been issued. In other words, the “paymen...

10. X v Secretary for Justice [2023] NZRA 002 (26 April 2023) [pdf, 242 KB]

    ...of these cases, the Secretary acknowledged that the Applicant had undertaken all or most of the pre-trial work and trial work. In the third case, the Applicant undertook all the work, but the matter was resolved just before trial with a guilty plea to a lower charge. [26] The fourth case example referred to by Mr Hurd was a murder trial (PAL 4) in which the Applicant had appeared as junior counsel. Mr Hurd acknowledged that the Applicant had cross-examined some Crown witnesses...