Search Results

1. [2018] NZEmpC 98 Ovation NZ Ltd v The NZ Meat Workers and Related Trades Union [pdf, 343 KB]

   ...plaintiffs’ application should accordingly be dismissed. c) The categories of documents sought contain no time limitation. d) The documents sought are irrelevant; reference was made to the fact that the plaintiff had not filed a statement of defence to the defendant’s particulars as contained in its memorandum to the Court of 7 August 2018, which followed the Court’s interlocutory judgment of 10 August 2018.3 e) The evidence from the plaintiffs’ witness was sp...

2. BORA Evidence Bill [pdf, 406 KB]

   ...hearsay evidence give rise to issues of consistency with s25(a) (right to a fair hearing) and s25(f) (right to examine witnesses for the prosecution). 11. The ability to admit hearsay evidence is subject to requirements as to the reliability of the statement and either the witness being unavailable or the Judge considering that undue expense and delay would be caused if the maker of the statement were required to be a witness. 12. The Court of Appeal has indicated that, subject to bein...

3. [2019] NZEmpC 192 Johnson v Chief of the New Zealand Defence Force [pdf, 394 KB]

   ...informed by NZDF that an inquiry would be undertaken because the sending of the email amounted to an apparent security breach, he said his email account must have been spoofed or hacked because he was not the sender. Subsequently, he presented statements from himself and an IT specialist to support his response. Ultimately NZDF concluded it was very likely he had sent the email, but it would not pursue a disciplinary process. [3] Mr Johnson raised a disadvantage grievance...

4. [2020] NZEmpC 207 Eastern Bays Hospice Trust T/A Dove Hospice v Raggett [pdf, 176 KB]

   ...Pa’u, advocate for defendants Judgment: 25 November 2020 INTERLOCUTORY JUDGMENT (NO 2) OF CHIEF JUDGE CHRISTINA INGLIS (Application for leave to file amended pleadings) [1] The plaintiff has applied for leave to file an amended statement of claim. Leave is required because the case has been set down for hearing, on 10 and 11 December 2020. The application is opposed by the defendants, essentially on the ground of prejudice. I heard further from the representa...

5. [2014] NZEmpC 182 Fletcher v Sharp Studhope Lawyers [pdf, 75 KB]

   ...additional issues, which have been put to one side for present purposes. [4] Mr Fletcher has also pursued a strike out application, on the ground that STL has no standing in this Court. The basis for that contention is that STL failed to file a statement in reply in the Authority within the timeframe specified in the Employment Relations Authority Regulations 2000 (namely within 14 days of service of the statement of problem on STL). 1 [5] Accordingly, there are two applicatio...

6. [2012] NZEmpC 85 Patel v Pegasus Stations Ltd [pdf, 46 KB]

   ...Judgment: 31 May 2012 INTERLOCUTORY JUDGMENT OF JUDGE B S TRAVIS [1] The plaintiff (Mr Patel) has filed a memorandum on 14 May 2012 in which he states there has been no cross-challenge issued by the defendant (Pegasus Stations Ltd) against his statement of claim in the statement of defence dated 7 December 2011. He seeks a “hearing in favour of the plaintiff without any direction conference and without delay”. [2] Although it does not include a cross-challenge, the sta...

7. [2020] NZEmpC 170 New Zealand Technology Group Hawkes Bay Ltd v Flashoff [pdf, 244 KB]

   ...contacting clients of NZTG in breach of non-solicitation covenants, and in breach of restrictions not to use NZTG’s confidential information; and d) taking NZTG’s assets and equipment with them upon resignation. [10] On 10 September 2020, a statement of problem was filed in the Employment Relations Authority by NZTG in which a range of declarations and orders including damages and penalties were sought based on the above allegations. An application for an interim injunction wit...

8. [2011] NZEmpC 136 Croft v Transfield Services NZ Ltd [pdf, 64 KB]

   ...defendant and to the defendant’s counsel. It was for this reason that the discontinuance of proceedings was filed. [10] Following the attempted filing of the notice of discontinuance the plaintiffs were directed to file and serve an amended statement of claim with the correct particulars of the plaintiffs. Once that had been done, if it was the position that those plaintiffs did not wish to proceed, a further notice of discontinuance should be filed. Mr Yukich advised the Cou...

9. [2017] NZEmpC 63 Fuimaono v Houia [pdf, 164 KB]

   ...employee by instalments, but only if the financial position of the employer requires it. 11 At [14]. 12 At [15]. 13 At [39]. 14 At [40]. The pleadings [15] In the statement of claim which Heather Fuimaono and Mahia Fuimaono filed in this Court, it was asserted that the Authority’s decision was wrong because Ms Houia’s employer was KFL. [16] In support of this assertion, they pleaded that KFL w...

10. Auckland Standards Committee 1 v Arman [2019] NZLCDT 18 [pdf, 340 KB]

    ...the exception of the meeting on 29 August 2016 when the guilty plea was entered. [23] At no stage did the practitioner discuss trial strategy with WJ or Ms O. Nor did he seek or obtain instructions from WJ about his version of events, possible defence witnesses, or the possibility of non-party disclosure from Child Youth and Family or others. Nor did he discuss the nature of the defence for trial. [24] On the morning that the trial was due to commence, 29 August 2016, Mr Arman m...