Search Results

1. Hawke's Bay Standards Committee v Queenin [2020] NZLCDT 26 (25 August 2020) [pdf, 166 KB]

   ...response following service. This was filed on 13 May 2020. Ms Queenin initially denied the charges and particulars filed in support. [5] Ms Queenin participated in a telephone conference in early June and was given a further 21 days to file her affidavit in response. That affidavit was never filed and shortly after this conference Ms Queenin indicated dissatisfaction with the disciplinary process, which she simply requested to be “cancelled”. She further indicated that, de...

2. ENVC Matiatia transcript notice of motion 20150326 [pdf, 478 KB]

   ...the baking the cake will taste different, it will have a different texture it won’t be the same as the proposal that is presently 15 before the Court because of this essential effect disproportional disproportionality. Mr Mitchell’s affidavit actually confirms the essential point with respect that the effects are different in nature and scale and therefore the change is out of 20 scope. He talks about now a need for public drop off car parks to be used where previously t...

3. Graeme James Lawrence - Evidence in Chief [pdf, 3.4 MB]

   ...Moutere Matakana. 1. 7 My ·evidence is prepared in support of the Motiti Natural Environment Management Area (MNEMA) which I have introduced, and prepared evidence on, in previous hearings before the Environment Court on the BOP pRCEP: . a. Affidavit of Evidence (16 August 2016) in respect to the Application for Strike Out & Declaration. ln that, 1 referenced provision on management of fishing activities in the Marlborough Proposed Unitary Plan 2016, the use of Prohibited Activ...

4. Dorbu v The Lawyers and Conveyancers Disciplinary Tribunal Anor [2011] NZLCDT CIV 2009 404 7381 [pdf, 288 KB]

   DORBU V THE LAWYERS AND CONVEYANCERS DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL HC AK CIV-2009-404- 7381 [11 May 2011] IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY CIV-2009-404-7381 BETWEEN JOHN EVANS DORBU Applicant AND THE LAWYERS AND CONVEYANCERS DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL First Respondent AND NEW ZEALAND LAW SOCIETY Second Respondent Hearing: 16 March 2011 Counsel: Applicant in person H Keyte QC and M A Treleaven for Respondents Judgment: 11 May 2011

5. [2010] NZEmpC 108 MacBeth v Cookie Time Limited [pdf, 22 KB]

   ...provided a detailed reply in which he said that the plaintiff wished to proceed with his case. Mr Fairclough responded with an application to strike out the claim for want of prosecution which was filed on 18 March 2010. Each party has filed an affidavit in relation to this application: by the plaintiff on his own behalf and by Mr Pope-Mayell for the defendant. By agreement, counsel have made submissions in writing. Principles [8] The principles applicable to an application to...

6. [2006] NZEmpC AC 53A/06 Graham v Crestline Pty Ltd [pdf, 26 KB]

   ...litigation stakes. It says Mr Graham’s claims exceeded $480,000. The defendant says its solicitors had to file and serve an application for leave to file an amended statement of defence out of time; to file and serve an application and supporting affidavit to have Crestline’s application to strike the challenge out heard as a preliminary issue; to arrange attendances in respect of timetabling including Mr Graham’s request to amend the timetable; to consider and review the affi...

7. [2016] NZEmpC 12 Auckland International Airport Ltd v APC oral judgement [pdf, 84 KB]

   ...scheduled first call of the case following the making of freezing orders affecting her on 15 February 2016. [2] The orders that follow on the applicant’s request are to lie in court until the applicant proves service on the first respondent by affidavit later today. [3] Subject to proof of service as just outlined, I am satisfied that the proceedings have been brought to the first respondent’s attention, although there is nothing in the evidence, or that counsel are able to info...

8. [2017] NZEmpC 137 Adison Group Ltd v Belliard [pdf, 140 KB]

   ...apply to the High Court to wind-up the plaintiff. c. It is highly unlikely that a liquidator would want to continue with the challenge, so that it is likely that a refusal of a stay would render the challenge nugatory. d. As appear from the affidavit of Bhushan Arolkar filed in support. [8] Mr Arolkar deposes that the plaintiff has no cash with which to pay the sums ordered by the Authority. He says that, without a stay, Mr Balliard would be able to wind up Adison Group Ltd....

9. [2019] NZEmpC 19 Waste Management New Zealand Ltd v Jones [pdf, 321 KB]

   ...success. The interests of justice were said to favour granting leave. The application relied on the Employment Court’s Practice Directions, s 219(1) of the Act and P v A.3 [5] Surprisingly, the application was not accompanied by a supporting affidavit for, or on behalf of, Ms Jones explaining why a statement of defence was not filed. An affidavit should have been filed and it is a matter of good fortune for the outcome of this application that Waste Management does not object...

10. [2016] EmpC 128 Vasona Networks Inc v Sunder [pdf, 83 KB]

    ...independently triggered by an appeal, meaning that a late appeal will [cause] the cross appeal to be out of time in any event; (d) It is in the interests of justice … [10] A draft statement of claim was filed with this application together with an affidavit by Mr Sood, who is the Chief Executive of Vasona, and is based in California. In his affidavit, Mr Sood expressed disappointment at the determination of the Authority and the award to Mr Sunder of $10,000. He explained that...