Search Results

1. [2014] NZEmpC 103 Hill v Teck Properties Ltd costs [pdf, 68 KB]

   ...set down for hearing but was subsequently vacated. [2] While the substantive proceeding has effectively been brought to an end, the plaintiff seeks reimbursement of the costs he has incurred in this Court. The defendant company did not file a statement of defence or take any other steps in the proceeding but has filed submissions in response to the plaintiff’s costs memoranda. [3] It is necessary to understand the background to this matter to put the application for full costs...

2. [2011] NZEmpC 86 Wilson v ABC Developmental Learning Centres NZ Ltd [pdf, 71 KB]

   ...day’s hearing. [14] In reaching that conclusion, I have had regard to Ms Douglas’ submission that some of the time spent by the plaintiff’s counsel was unnecessary. In particular Ms Douglas referred to time involved in preparing an amended statement of claim ordered by the Court to remedy deficiencies in the original document and time spent briefing the evidence of witnesses not called. I agree that costs associated with such activities were not reasonably incurred but it is...

3. [2009] NZEmpC AC 29/09 Ogilvy NZ Ltd v Whitten [pdf, 26 KB]

   ...Judgment: 14 August 2009 JUDGMENT OF B S TRAVIS [1] The applicant, Ogilvy New Zealand (Ogilvy NZ) has applied for leave to challenge out of time a costs determination of the Employment Relations Authority issued on 31 March 2009. The statement of claim challenging the determination was two days late. The application for leave has been opposed by the respondent. [2] With the agreement of counsel, it was determined that, in order to avoid further costs, the matter sho...

4. [2006] NZEmpC AC 42/06 Mills v Macks Seafoods (1997) Ltd [pdf, 32 KB]

   ...declaration under s(6)(v) of the Employment Relations Act 2000 on 8 June 2005 claiming that he was an employee of the defendant. The defendant had previously denied in correspondence that the plaintiff was an employee and this denial was repeated in a statement of defence and counter claim filed on 30 June 2005 and in submissions filed by counsel for the defendant in relation to the defendant’s application for disclosure. [2] The plaintiff sought disclosure documents from the de...

5. [2023] NZEmpC 59 Hamilton Civil Plant Ltd v Carr [pdf, 186 KB]

   ...considerations which go both ways. In the particular circumstances, and having regard to the broader interests of justice, I consider it appropriate to exercise the Court’s discretion to grant leave to extend time to file a challenge. [23] The draft statement of claim is to be treated as having been filed. The filing fee on the statement of claim is to be paid within seven days of the date of this judgment. Mr Carr will have the usual time (which will run from the date of this...

6. Regulatory Impact Statement: Amendments to the Sentencing Act 2002 [pdf, 1 MB]

   Regulatory Impact Statement | 1 Regulatory Impact Statement: Amendments to the Sentencing Act 2002 Purpose of Document Decision sought: The RIS provides analysis of proposed amendments to the Sentencing Act 2002, to support decision making on each individual proposal. Advising agencies: Ministry of Justice Proposing Ministers: Minister of Justice Date finalised: 30 May 2024 Problem Definition In recent years, there has been a reduction in the use of imprisonment an...

7. [2013] NZEmpC 48 Wareing v Tyco New Zealand Ltd [pdf, 76 KB]

   ...his wish to 1 [2012] NZERA Christchurch 99. 2 Not Ms Dalziel who is counsel now representing Mr Wareing. challenge the Authority’s determination by hearing de novo. Z purported to file a statement of claim initiating the challenge on 25 June 2012, some six days late. It was not until almost two months later, on 20 August 2012, that the intending plaintiff’s application for leave to extend time was filed. Even then, neither...

8. [2012] NZEmpC 189 Haig v Carrington Farms & Ors [pdf, 250 KB]

   ...to elucidate them) will be capable of proof at trial. The applications to strike out causes of action on limitations’ grounds will be determined accordingly. Relevant factual background [18] The following is taken from the parties’ latest statements of claim and counterclaim supplemented, where appropriate, by evidence necessary to determine these limitations questions. [19] The first and second defendants, Edgewater Developers Limited (EDL) and Carrington Farms Limited (CF...

9. [2015] NZEmpC 180 Keepa v Go Bus Transport Ltd [pdf, 150 KB]

   ...constructive dismissal, accord and satisfaction, and the Latin maxim nemo judex in sua causa 2 are included as issues for determination in this judgment. Pleadings [5] The final pleadings by each of the parties consists of: (a) an amended statement of claim filed by Mr Keepa on 23 September 2013; (b) an amended statement of defence filed on 23 October 2013; [6] In the statement of claim Mr Keepa elected a challenge against the whole of the determination by way of a heari...

10. [2012] NZEmpC 94 Gini v Literacy Training Ltd [pdf, 93 KB]

    ...Training deposited with the Court the sum of $15,140 pursuant to an agreement that had been reached between the parties whereby there would be a stay of enforcement of the Authority’s determination pending the outcome of the challenge. [5] In her statement of defence dated 9 December 2011, Ms Gini cross- challenged seeking increases in the amounts awarded for loss of remuneration and compensation. She also sought an order for costs in both jurisdictions. On 21 December 2011, th...