Search Results

1. LCRO 72/2020 ZW v CB (29 September 2020) [pdf, 204 KB]

   ...application for review on 16 April 2020. [35] He submits that: (a) The Standards Committee inquiry was only focused on the issue as to whether fees charged were fair and reasonable; and (b) His original letter of complaint (as described by Mr ZW- “in defence”) didn’t mention fees. [36] Mr ZW attached to his review application, his correspondence to NZLS of 22 May 2019, and his response to Mr CB of 12 August 2019. [37] Essentially, his application for review replicated the...

2. [2021] NZIACDT 26 - RH v Ji - Sanctions (23 December 2021) [pdf, 277 KB]

   ...(30 November 2021), Mr Ji states that he did not receive the notice from the Tribunal that the complaint had been referred to it. This was why he did not engage with the Tribunal. Mr Ji thanked the Tribunal for its time. He would set out his defence and comments, hoping this would lead to a fair and justified sanctions decision. [29] As for the breaches upheld (using the same numbering as [11] above), Mr Ji: (1) Admits not providing the draft letter and breaching cl 1. He did n...

3. Williams v Attorney-General [2024] NZHRRT 1 [pdf, 214 KB]

   ...are not accessed as of right.17 Any award under PA, s 88 must be an appropriate response to the circumstances. Damages for loss of benefit [71] Ms Williams seeks damages for loss of a benefit in an amount of $20,000. [72] Ms Williams’ statement of claim alleges that as a consequence of Corrections’ interference with her privacy, she was unable to prepare for a forthcoming parole hearing. [73] Ms Williams appeared for the first time before the Parole Board 2 April 2020. T...

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

   ...whether he could see any video footage that the complainant had provided relating to writing on a window. Mr Hawkins again strenuously denied he would have done so and suggested Police should consider charging the complainant with making a false statement. He advised that the cameras on his property were fake cameras. [32] Ms Art gave evidence for Police and was cross examined by Mr Hawkins in open court. Her open evidence included that Mr Hawkins’ request was straightforward,...

5. Auckland Standards Committee 3 v Woodroffe [2025] NZLCDT 1 (7 January 2025) [pdf, 258 KB]

   ...[14] The client complained to the Law Society in December 2020. Mrs Woodroffe was informed in late December 2020. The charges are dated 5 April 2024 (more than three years later). Mrs Woodroffe, who is responsible for providing material for her defence, 6 Bundle, 23 - 24. 7 Bundle, 123. 8 Bundle, 25. 9 Bundle, 59 at [10]. 10 Bundle, 60 - 65, 10 October 2019 to 10 September 2020. 6 has had ample time to prepare. We accord no weight to Mrs Woodroffe’s suggestion tha...

6. [2018] NZEnvC 179 Panuku Development Auckland Limited v Auckland Council [pdf, 11 MB]

   ...summary and in some detail in the evidence in chief for Panuku of Mr RM Marler, Director Design and Place, of the company? The application seeks consent for the establishment of infrastructure to support the America's Cup 36 ("AC36") defence, the Event itself, and any subsequent defender races within the next ten years. Attached as Appendix 8, for ease of understanding the site and its locality, is a drawing "MARINE WORKS CIVIL DRAWING 1 OVERALL LAYOUT GENERAL AR...

7. [2007] NZEmpC CC 14/07 Kostic v Dodd and Milligan [pdf, 130 KB]

   ...[3] Mr Kostic challenged the Authority’s determination. As filed, that challenge focussed on the assessment of contribution and the Authority’s refusal to award any remedies. A hearing was sought only in respect of selected issues. In the statement of defence, the employer made a cross-challenge to the Authority’s determination as to costs. [4] At that stage of the matter, Mr Kostic was represented by counsel. In a telephone conference with counsel on 5 May 2006, it was...

8. [2013] NZEmpC 197 Electrical Union 2001 Inc and Anor v Mighty River Power [pdf, 239 KB]

   ELECTRICAL UNION 2001 INCORPORATED v MIGHTY RIVER POWER LIMITED NZEmpC AUCKLAND [2013] NZEmpC 197 [24 October 2013] IN THE EMPLOYMENT COURT AUCKLAND [2013] NZEmpC 197 ARC 21/13 IN THE MATTER OF a challenge to a determination of the Employment Relations Authority BETWEEN ELECTRICAL UNION 2001 INCORPORATED First Plaintiff AND DEAN GREGORY COWELL Second Plaintiff AND MIGHTY RIVER POWER LIMITED Defendant Hearing: 30 Au

9. [2013] NZEmpC 60 Snowdon v Radio New Zealand Ltd [pdf, 236 KB]

   LYNNE FRANCES SNOWDON V RADIO NEW ZEALAND LIMITED NZEmpC WN [2013] NZEmpC 60 [12 April 2013] IN THE EMPLOYMENT COURT WELLINGTON [2013] NZEmpC 60 WRC 17/04 WRC 19/05 WRC 8/09 IN THE MATTER OF application for orders and for costs on adjournments AND IN THE MATTER OF proceedings removed from the Employment Relations Authority BETWEEN LYNNE FRANCES SNOWDON Plaintiff AND RADIO NEW ZEALAND LIMITED Defendant Hearing: By submissions filed by t

10. Hutcheson v Houkamau - Porangahau 2B No 10 (2021) 88 Takitimu MB 118 (88 TKT 118) [pdf, 581 KB]

    88 Tākitimu MB 118 I TE KOOTI WHENUA MĀORI O AOTEAROA I TE ROHE O TĀKITIMU In the Māori Land Court of New Zealand Tākitimu District A20180005757 WĀHANGA Under Regulation 21, Māori Reservation Regulations 1994 Sections 37, 236, 237, 238, 239 and 240, Te Ture Whenua Māori Act 1993 MŌ TE TAKE In the matter of Porangahau 2B No 10 and Other Blocks (Rongomaraeroa Marae) I WAENGA I A Between AIMEE WHAITIRI HUTCHESON, NICHOLAS REIHANA