Search Results

1. [2014] NZEmpC 138 Kellerman v Stoneware 91 Limited t/a Switched on Gardener [pdf, 79 KB]

   ...at stake. [14] It seems to me that the only practical way of deciding a challenge to a costs determination is for the Court to be primarily informed through the submissions of the parties, with the possibility that this may be supported by affidavit evidence about contentious issues. In most cases, there will not be a hearing at which the parties or their agents appear in person. Thus, resolving differences between the parties or their representatives will be problematic. In...

2. [2014] NZEmpC 177 SAI Systems Ltd v Bird [pdf, 81 KB]

   ...2013 against the defendant, Sai Systems Ltd (Sai), claiming that Sai had refused or failed to honour the terms and conditions of employment that he had enjoyed immediately before it took over the cleaning contract from Seyclean. Mr Bird filed an affidavit in support of his challenge in which he claimed that he is owed over $15,000 (gross) by Sai in wage arrears. He deposed that he does not have any issue with Seyclean. [5] Part 6A of the Act deals with the continuity of employment...

3. Dobson – Ahipara 2B47 (2014) 74 Taitokerau MB 139 (74 TTK 139) [pdf, 106 KB]

   ...Court made an order under s 68 of the 1974 Act whereby the land returned to its status as Māori freehold land. [6] In early 1983 Mr Motu, acting as administrator of his late wife’s estate, agreed to sell the land to Mr and Mrs Dobson. In his affidavit Mr Dobson says that he was not aware that the land was Māori freehold land. I accept that was so. I note that at the time the transfer documents and certificate of title did not record the land to be Māori freehold land. [7] Mr...

4. Auckland Standards Committee v Hong [2014] NZLCDT 16 [pdf, 70 KB]

   ...stand. [8] Secondly, if we are incorrect in that view, we would examine the delivery issue as follows: in support of his contention that the determination was not received, Mr Hong described his mail arrangements, and indeed we also have a full affidavit from 1 Auckland Standards Committee v Hart [2012] NZLCDT 20. 5 the Standards Committee setting out the process by which communications have occurred with Mr Hong in the past,...

5. Auckland Standards Committee v Potter [2014] NZLCDT 63 [pdf, 62 KB]

   ...protect the public. Issue 2 - aggravating features [19] While at all times courteous, it has to be noted at times the practitioner failed to comply with directions and indeed filed no formal response to the charge faced by him. Nor did he file an affidavit. He simply appeared on the day and presented his arguments. We considered he failed to accord a proper level of seriousness to his failure to comply with the undertaking given to the Tribunal. He seemed to think he was no lo...

6. VUW v Accident Compensation Corporation & QRS (Jurisdiction Objection) [2014] NZHRRT 26 [pdf, 49 KB]

   ...objection to jurisdiction. In that respect it abides the decision of the Tribunal on the challenge. See the Minute issued on 12 December 2013 at [14]. [9.2] After the Chairperson issued a Minute on 28 February 2014 drawing attention to the absence of affidavit evidence establishing the facts on which the Tribunal was to decide the protest to jurisdiction, the Privacy Commissioner explicitly conceded the facts as asserted by the second defendant and advised that no evidence would be ne...

7. Waikato Bay of Plenty Standards Committee v Cooper [2015] NZLCDT 7 [pdf, 49 KB]

   ...as follows: a. The respondent’s email to the Court dated 14 May 2012 in which he requested an adjournment of the hearing set for 28 May 2012 for the 5 reason that he had a case in the Christchurch Court on that day. (Exhibit GH6 to the affidavit of Garreth Heyns of 16 February 2015). b. An email from the Registrar of the Court to the respondent dated 24th May 2012 recording that Judge Cooper had directed that the application for adjournment was to be argued on the date of...

8. DR v AKSC1 LCRO 28 / 2010 (15 August 2011) [pdf, 88 KB]

   ...represented them on a variety of charges, and at a variety of different hearings, including bail applications, bail variation applications, status hearings, defended hearings, section 94 LTA submissions, and section 81 LTA submissions requiring affidavits and supporting documentation, amongst other hearings on behalf of the referee. The references record the referee’s confidence in the applicant’s abilities and include confirmation that the referee would have no hesitation in i...

9. Ashley v Bull [2011] NZWHT Wellington 25 [pdf, 67 KB]

   ...[15] It is important that this application be considered in its context. The application relates not to costs incurred at a substantive hearing but in relation to interlocutory removal applications based in large part on limitation defences. The affidavit evidence filed by the second and third respondents, while clearly supporting the limitation and other defences, also suggested that those two parties did have some involvement with aspects of construction during a period of time...

10. Brownlie v Brown - Pipituangi A (2010) 7 Tairāwhiti MB (7 TRW 39) [pdf, 417 KB]

    ...in any case, even if he was successful, it would be difficult to see this Court granting a partition that would upset a binding lease. In short the Brownlies' lease was safe and has proven to be so. Miscellaneous issues [34] In both the affidavit supporting their application and in the subsequent hearings the Brownlies have brought up several issues and instances which they claim adds to the picture of misconduct by the trustees outside the two issues I have 7 Tairawhiti...