Search Results

1. [2018] NZEmpC 129 Secretary for Justice, MOJ v NZ PSA [pdf, 266 KB]

   ...plaintiff has applied for urgency in respect of the application for injunctive relief which has been made on notice. Such urgency has been granted and timetabling was set to enable the defendant to respond to the application and if possible, file a statement of defence. I record that the defendant has been able to plead and has filed a statement of defence, notice of opposition and affidavits in support. Background [7] The parties to the dispute are currently engaged in collecti...

2. LCRO 58/2018 QD v FZ (12 October 2018) [pdf, 133 KB]

   ...error of law because good cause means an underlying evidential foundation, which he had; 3. Made an error of law that a public record could be confidential information; 4. Failed to take into account relevant considerations that he raised in his defence, that: (a) neither the Judge nor Legal Aid took any issue with his memorandum; (b) the LCRO205/2014 decision to which he referred which says that disciplinary action is not necessary for every breach; (c) the Committee overlooked t...

3. [2020] NZEmpC 79 Kim v Smile Devon Ltd [pdf, 226 KB]

   ...present purposes that there is sufficient evidence to suggest SDL has a relevant asset in New Zealand, and that there is a qualifying risk of dissipation of the asset if a freezing order is not granted, at least for a limited period. Possible defences [31] No submission has been placed before the Court as to whether SDL might have a defence or defences. [32] It is conceivable that there are relevant factors which may have to be considered with regard to the apparent sale; that...

4. [2016] NZEmpC 158 Kidd v Beaumont [pdf, 460 KB]

   ...Relations Act 2000 (the Act). Mrs Kidd is not now a plaintiff. 1 Kidd v Beaumont [2016] NZERA Auckland 64. The pleadings [5] It is appropriate to refer to the pleadings (the latest statements of claim and defence) in the case because these determine the relevant issues between the parties. The Court was not provided with the statements of problem and reply which would have been before the Authority. At least until the...

5. [2022] NZEmpC 4 Chief of the New Zealand Defence Force v Darnley [pdf, 401 KB]

   THE CHIEF OF NEW ZEALAND DEFENCE FORCE v JULIETTE DARNLEY [2022] NZEmpC 4 [30 March 2022] IN THE EMPLOYMENT COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WELLINGTON I TE KŌTI TAKE MAHI O AOTEAROA TE WHANGANUI-A-TARA [2022] NZEmpC 4 EMPC 359/2020 IN THE MATTER OF a challenge to a determination of the Employment Relations Authority BETWEEN THE CHIEF OF NEW ZEALAND DEFENCE FORCE Plaintiff AND JULIETTE DARNLEY Defendant Hearing: 29–30 April and...

6. [2015] NZEmpC 170 Mahamai v Belley (Labour Inspector) [pdf, 171 KB]

   ...it would have provided information that could have been used to test and examine Ms Belley’s claims. [25] The failure take on more significance when the statement of claim filed in the Employment Court is considered. Contained therein is a defence that was not raised with the Authority and which, on the evidence before me and contrary to the content of the statement of claim, was not aired with Ms Belley. It is that Ms Mahamai was not the employer. [26] If this defence has v...

7. Racing Industry Bill [pdf, 152 KB]

   ...on behalf of any other person. A person guilty for either offence is liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding $5,000. 32. Strict liability offences prima facie limit s 25(c) of the Bill of Rights Act because the accused is required to prove a defence, or disprove a presumption, in order to avoid liability. 33. We consider that this limit to the right under s 25(c) of the Bill of Rights Act is justified in the circumstances. In reaching this conclusion we have taken into account th...

8. [2024] NZEmpC 159 Batta v Auckland Catering Ltd [pdf, 197 KB]

   ...with, and the present application has been made. The proceedings were set down for formal proof [7] Ms Batta’s counsel filed an affidavit confirming service of the proceedings on the defendants. Neither Auckland Catering Ltd nor Mr Rao filed a statement of defence or otherwise sought to participate in the proceedings. Ms Batta applied for judgment by default against the defendants.5 [8] On 10 June 2024, I recorded in a minute arising from a telephone directions conference th...

9. 2024-07-05-Notice-of-Hearing-King-Shag.pdf [pdf, 256 KB]

   ...where the hearing time allocated by the Court is not used. 3 EVIDENCE The parties must (subject to any existing timetable order or direction of the Court): Exchange no later than 10 working days before the date of hearing - all of the statements and evidence that will be produced to the Court at the hearing. 4 MĀORI LANGUAGE AND SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS If any party or witness: 1. wishes to speak Māori at the hearing under the Māori Language Act 1987, or 2. has speci...

10. [2025] NZEmpC 110 Oliver v Biggs [pdf, 207 KB]

    ...$7,200.3 [5] On 12 October 2021, Mr Oliver filed another claim against Mr Biggs seeking a compliance order and costs. Initial steps taken to manage the proceeding to a hearing were conducted in Mr Biggs’ absence, because he did not file a statement of defence. On 3 May 2022, the Court ordered Mr Biggs to comply with the previous costs decision and to pay $7,200, within 28 days.4 He was ordered to pay costs arising from that claim of $3,600. The costs of that claim were not...