3030 items matching your search terms
ROBERT RICHARD GREENSLADE v JETSTAR AIRWAYS LIMITED NZEmpC AUCKLAND [2014] NZEmpC 23 [14 February] IN THE EMPLOYMENT COURT AUCKLAND [2014] NZEmpC 23 ARC 91/12 IN THE MATTER OF a challenge to a determination of the Employment Relations Authority BETWEEN ROBERT RICHARD GREENSLADE Plaintiff AND JETSTAR AIRWAYS LIMITED Defendant Hearing: Court: 6-7 May 2013 Chief Judge G L Colgan Judge Christina Inglis Judge M E
...deceptive and misleading in his dealings with Ms QK? General Comments [29] At the conclusion of its decision, the Committee noted that the practice of law can be a robust profession, in which it is not uncommon for practitioners to engage in spirited defences on behalf of their colleagues and clients. [30] In what presented as a mild rebuke to the parties, the Committee noted that it was a significant step for a practitioner to file a complaint against a fellow practitioner and...
Identifying and Responding to Bias in the Criminal Justice System: A Review of International and New Zealand Research Identifying and Responding to Bias in the Criminal Justice System: A Review of International and New Zealand Research Bronwyn Morrison November 2009 2 Identifying and responding to bias in the criminal justice system This research was undertaken by the Research, Evaluat
SMITH & SILK v CCC – CONSENT ORDER IN THE ENVIRONMENT COURT AT CHRISTCHURCH I TE KŌTI TAIAO O AOTEAROA KI ŌTAUTAHI Decision No. [2022] NZEnvC 86 IN THE MATTER of the Resource Management Act 1991 AND an appeal under s 120 of the Act BETWEEN P SMITH AND C SILK (ENV-2021-CHC-84) Appellants AND CHRISTCHURCH CITY COUNCIL Respondent Environment Judge J E Borthwick – sitting alone under s 279 of the Act In Chambers at Christchurch Date of Consent Order: 25 May 202
GRENADIER LIMITED v MANAWATŪ-WHANGANUI REGIONAL COUNCIL IN THE ENVIRONMENT COURT AT WELLINGTON I TE KŌTI TAIAO O AOTEAROA KI TE WHANGANUI-A-TARA Decision No. [2024] NZEnvC 183 IN THE MATTER of an appeal under s 120 of the Resource Management Act 1991 BETWEEN GRENADIER LIMITED (ENV-2022-WLG-24) Appellant AND MANAWATŪ-WHANGANUI REGIONAL COUNCIL Respondent Court: Environment Judge L J Semple Environment Judge S M Tepania Environment Commissioner R M Bartlett
...a qualified trimmer nor a qualified packer. [29] As to trimming, the evidence was that staff in the coated products section usually spent several weeks trimming wet fish during the height of the hoki season. Although Mr Towner amended the statement of defence in the course of the hearing to deny that Mrs Page was skilled and experienced in trimming any species of fish, both Mr Sowman and Mr Romano accepted that she was experienced in trimming hoki. That was consistent with the...
...refer the parties to mediation or further mediation unless there are persuasive reasons why that should not occur. I consider that this is a case that should go to mediation and so direct. [79] In the meantime, Mr Austin should file and serve a statement of claim addressing the merits of his grievances and the defendant should file and serve a statement of defence to this. If mediation is to no avail, counsel should so advise the Registrar who should then arrange a telephone direc...
...opportunity to address the concerns arising on review, and was then invited to tender submissions on penalty. His submissions record his view that his conduct does not warrant an adverse conduct finding because his reliance on Mr GN is a complete defence. For the reasons discussed above, that is not correct. It is therefore necessary to consider what orders, if any, should result. [97] Section 352 of the LCA, which deals with penalty in respect of complaints dealt with under...
...Police from the date the production order was served, but says this should not have included copies of mail that pre-dated the production order. He takes no issue with the “Thora” letter being provided to the Police in June 2014. [18] In his statement of claim Mr Wati complained that: [18.1] His mail was collected unlawfully, in breach of Principle 1. [18.2] His mail was collected indirectly and covertly, in breach of Principle 2. [18.3] His mail was collected without him bein...
...[6] Mr OT duly attended to the work necessary to obtain his client’s consent, and the required E-dealing attendances. [7] Mr BL submitted the E-dealing for registration in mid-February 2017. [8] On 21 February 2017, Mr OT sent an invoice and statement to Mr BL for $4,465.00 including GST and disbursements. Of that sum, $3,550.00 plus GST was Mr OT’s professional fees. Mr OT’s covering letter said in part: We note that all of the work that should be required of us has now bee...