Search Results

1. LCRO 40/2021 PT v UT and RL t/a Law Firm A (28 April 2022) [pdf, 266 KB]

   ...trust arose, [LAW FIRM A] recognised that they could be conflicted in continuing to act for Mr SZ and Mrs QT, and in recognition of that potential for conflict, referred both to another [City A] law firm ([Law Firm D]). [9] Mr PT prepared a draft statement of claim for filing in the High Court. Those anticipated proceedings named his client AI as plaintiff, Ms LM (Mr HT’s widow of his second marriage) as first defendant, and Mr SZ and Mrs QT as second and third defendants in thei...

2. Alchin and Scott TRI 2020-100-001 [2022] NZWHT AUCKLAND 01 [pdf, 374 KB]

   IN THE WEATHERTIGHT HOMES TRIBUNAL TRI 2020-100-001 [2022] NZWHT AUCKLAND 01 BETWEEN ROSEMARY ALICE ALCHIN and SIMON FRANCIS SCOTT Claimants AND HAMILTON CITY COUNCIL Respondent Hearing: 6 and 7 May 2021 and 21 October 2021 Closing submissions: Claimants 11 November 2021 Respondents 25 November 2021 Claimants reply 2 December 2021 Appearances: Scott McKenna and Amin Osama for the claimants Paul Robertson and John Tian for the first respondent

3. [2020] NZREADT 12 - Feschiev (4 May 2020) [pdf, 241 KB]

   ...they went back to Australia. Matters were left on the basis that once the vendors returned to Australia, they would locate the report and send it to Ms Cruickshank. [9] In fact, a copy of the report was eventually provided and it did contain a statement excluding the existence of any asbestos hazard in the building. The report was dated 27 June 2008. The copy came to hand at a point when Ms Cruickshank was no longer the selling agent. It stated that no asbestos had been found in...

4. [2013] NZEmpC 212 Gunning v Bankrupt Vehicle Sales and Finance Ltd [pdf, 64 KB]

   ...Wage Act 1983. Nature of the hearing: the issues will be at large with the onus on the plaintiff to establish his claims. [4] The Company was represented by Graham Hill, a solicitor practising in Blenheim. On behalf of the Company, he filed a statement of defence and appeared at the directions conference. At that conference, he said that, for reasons of cost, the Company would not be represented at the substantive hearing but wished to make submissions by way of memorandum. That...

5. [2014] NZEmpC 187 Walker v Delta Community Support Trust [pdf, 187 KB]

   ...NZERA Christchurch 137. [3] Although the challenge was instituted in July 2013, the matter has been the subject of a number of procedural difficulties to this point. [4] First, the pleadings took some time to be refined, with an amended statement of claim being filed on 14 October 2013, and an amended statement of defence on 16 October 2013. [5] Secondly in February 2014, the plaintiff instituted a disclosure process based on a list of documents which had been filed and...

6. [2016] NZEmpC 109 Dotcom v Orduna [pdf, 148 KB]

   ...is the challenge by the individual parties to the second determination of the Authority issued on 11 March 2016. 2 This is the case in particular in which these disputed document issues arise. I have had regard to the pleaded allegations and defences to justify the acceptance or refusal of disclosure of classes of documents by Mr Dotcom. [5] The third set of proceedings, which have been amalgamated for the purposes of a common hearing, will also affect the issues now for decisi...

7. Chief Registrar - Matauri X Incorporation [2005] Chief Judge's MB 276 (2005 CJ 276) [pdf, 962 KB]

   ...applying Mr \Vilson's first principles, that none of these categories of evidence or submission required the appointment of counsel. Any documents could have been filed by minute or memorandum of the Judge. In addition, I do not know vvhy a statement by the Judge that he had no contact with me while I was dealing with the application before me, could have assisted either him or me in dealing with our respective applications. Once again however, if the Judge considered such a st...

8. LCRO 173/2018 YN v LT (7 March 2019) [pdf, 186 KB]

   ...insistent that he did not proffer as explanation for his refusal to take up cudgels on Ms YN’s behalf that he was overcommitted and did not have time to take on her case. That account of events if it had been provided, would have grounded a solid defence to accusation that Mr LT had, without good cause, refused to act for Ms YN. Rule 4.1 permits a lawyer to refuse to act, if they do not have time to devote to the client’s case. 13 [73] In his submissions filed on review, M...

9. L v EQC [2021] CEIT-2019-0036 [pdf, 298 KB]

   ...Tribunal found that EQC’s decision to decline claims for damage from the earthquakes of 22 February 2011 and 23 December 2011 was correctly made. EQC made the allegations of fraud as it believed that Ms L and Mr M made intentionally false 2 statements in support of exaggerated or fabricated claims for emergency repairs. After hearing evidence from Ms L, Mr M and EQC, the Tribunal found that EQC was justified in its view (the Fraud decision). The full background to this matter...

10. [2021] NZEnvC 101 Close v Wellington City Council [pdf, 1.3 MB]

    ...traffic evidence. The Court issued a Minute on this matter on 11 September 2020 querying the need to call traffic evidence so it was still alive less than one month out from the hearing. Ultimately, the traffic witnesses provided a joint witness statement which Mr Robinson described as "not materially differing from the position set out in Mr de Koclc's evidence".2 · [23] WZAL contended that on that basis it was appropriate that there be full reimbursement of traffic...