Search Results

1. [2018] NZEnvC 018 The Architectural Centre v Wellington City Council [pdf, 430 KB]

   ...succeeded in its core legal and factual arguments. In summary, he submits that it would accord with normal practice to award costs of approximately one third of the Centre's actual and reasonable costs. In support of the application, there is an affidavit from Ms Christine McCarthy, the co-president of the Centre, which sets out the costs incurred in engaging Counsel and expert witnesses as a total of $92,227.16. That would mean of course that an award of one third of that sum wo...

2. [2018] NZEnvC 127 Mather v Far North District Council [pdf, 2 MB]

   ...being sought for the works undertaken if it is outside the terms of the Plan. Permitted activities under the plan [9] Both parties appear to agree that an exception to the control on earthworks relates to "normal rural practices". In an affidavit from the Council, Ms Wooster indicates that this has a definition within the Far North District Plan as follows: Means the maintenance of rural tracks, maintenance of dams, digging offal holes, establishment and maintenance of fen...

3. [2017] NZEmpC 143 Sawyer v Victoria University [pdf, 164 KB]

   ...the Authority of obligations under the United Nations Convention Against Corruption (CAC), Articles 5, 7 and 9; (d) the requirements on the Authority to consider Dr Sawyer’s rights under the Bill of Rights Act 1990; and (e) that some of the affidavit evidence submitted by the Vice-Chancellor in support of the application is incorrect. [13] At the same time as Dr Sawyer filed her challenge she filed a memorandum explaining her application for urgency. A brief passage stated her...

4. [2021] NZEmpC 50 Vulcan Steel Ltd v Manufacturing & Construction Workers Union [pdf, 183 KB]

   ...determination is dated 7 January 2021. That is the date from which the 28-day timeframe runs. That means that a challenge ought to have been filed no later than 4 February 2021. The company filed an application for leave on 5 February 2021. An affidavit filed in support of the application confirms that counsel was on leave, and out of cell phone coverage for part of the intervening period and returned to work later than expected, on 2 February 2021. The precise reason why no steps...

5. [2017] NZEmpC 18 Leota v Chief Executive of the Ministry of Social Development [pdf, 81 KB]

   ...relatively historic, showing that Mr Leota has substantial indebtedness and inability to meet his liabilities. [12] It would have been preferable if Mr Macdonald had arranged for Mr Leota to set out full details of his financial position in a sworn affidavit. However, I am prepared to accept Mr Macdonald’s statement that Mr Leota is the primary wage- earner in his family and supports young children; and that he is in a financially precarious position. Nevertheless, he rem...

6. Auckland Standards Committee 1 v Tregenza [2016] NZLCDT 31 [pdf, 132 KB]

   ...Tribunal. 5 [17] Counsel for the respondent submitted: (a) That the she did not engage in a deliberate act. He submitted that the respondent took advice before writing the letter of engagement in November 2015. (b) The detail given in her affidavit of 20 May 2016 should be read as being a fuller explanation of the situation and not as a changing of ground as was submitted by counsel for the applicant. [18] The Tribunal reached the conclusion that it was not necessary to...

7. [2020] NZEmpC 130 Tolson v Potter [pdf, 188 KB]

   ...Preparation for first directions conference 0.4 12 Filing memorandum for subsequent directions conference 0.8 (0.4 x 2) 13 Appearance at first or subsequent directions conference 0.4 (0.2 x 2) 36 Defendant’s preparation of affidavits 2 38 Defendant’s preparation of common bundle 1 39 Preparation for hearing 2 40 Appearance at hearing for sole of principal representative 0.75 Total 8.85 [4] Applying the daily rate for Category 2 proceedings of $2...

8. [2019] NZEmpC 128 Horizon Concepts Ltd v Hayward [pdf, 318 KB]

   ...position 6 See, for example, the comments in Xtreme Dining Ltd v Dewar [2017] NZEmpC 10 at [25]. was only generally described in his submissions and was not supported in any way, such as by affidavit evidence. Mr Hayward said nothing about his assets and it seems unlikely that he has none. One of the expenses listed by him was for fuel, presumably for a vehicle but that was not mentioned by him. Furthermore, there was some...

9. [2019] NZEmpC 107 Suncorp New Zealand Employees Ltd v Timms [pdf, 219 KB]

   ...would lose the opportunity to oppose the company’s application for a stay, which he wishes to do. [5] The plaintiff submits that the reasons for the delay have been neither adequately explained nor explained in an appropriate form (namely an affidavit); that it has been prejudiced through increased costs; and that, in the absence of filing a notice of opposition, it was entitled to consider that the matter was resolved. [6] The Court may extend time and, in exercising its jurisd...

10. [2018] NZSSAA 51 (12 October 2018) [pdf, 287 KB]

    ...decision the appellant received a letter setting out her appeal rights. d) The Ministry will be prejudiced if the application to extend time is granted because its ability to call witnesses will be affected. The appellant’s father who provided an affidavit confirming his daughter was living in a relationship for 13 years he has now passed away. One of the Ministry’s other key witnesses, the appellant’s uncle, is elderly and may not be able to appear at hearing. e) T...