Search Results

1. [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...

2. 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...

3. 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...

4. 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...

5. 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...

6. 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...

7. Butler - Mangawhati 3B1 and Takahiwai 3A2 (2010) 7 Taitokerau MB 260 (7 TTK 260) [pdf, 63 KB]

   ...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 Tairawhi...

8. Canterbury Westland Standards Committee 3 v Sullivan [2016] NZLCDT 13 [pdf, 53 KB]

   ...been made with the respondent was something that it could accept without a hearing. It accordingly directed a hearing indicating that the proposed penalty was not necessarily acceptable to it. The Tribunal required the respondent to file an affidavit of assets and liabilities prior to the hearing. 3 [5] The hearing as to penalty occurred on 29 April 2016 at which the Tribunal imposed the following orders: (a) Suspension for three years; (b) Censure; (c) Payment of the c...

9. M v U [2019] NZDT 1309 (21 August 2019) [pdf, 216 KB]

   ...a $200 filing fee for an appeal. You can only appeal outside of 28 days if you have been granted an extension of time by a District Court Judge. To apply for an extension of time you must file an Interlocutory Application on Notice and a supporting affidavit, and serve it on the other parties. There is a fee for this application. District Court proceedings are more complex than Disputes Tribunal proceedings, and you may wish to seek legal advice. The District Court may, on determination...

10. MacDonald - Oraka 4A2 (2006) 111 Wairoa MB 32 (111 WR 32) [pdf, 194 KB]

    ...would better managed or utilised as general land in terms of section 136(1)( d)/93. The matter was then adjourned to chambers in order for the purchasers to make submissions regarding this section. 1 1 Minute Book: 111 WR 34 [1] A sworn affidavit and a valuation were supplied to the Court by Mr Lyall on 19 August 2005. In a subseqllent direction dated 30 August 2005, I asked that a bank officer give information regarding the inability to provide finance for Maori freehold land...