Search Results

1. [2025] NZEmpC 168 Jenner v Corrections Association of New Zealand Incf [pdf, 287 KB]

   ...entitled to specificity. [76] Mr Little also submits that the explanations are shifting. He says that certain issues were never put to Mr Jenner as grounds for removal in the notice, but have been raised subsequently in Mr du Plessis’ affidavit. Further, he notes that these issues would not have been before the executive committee whose knowledge would have been confined to issues in the 26 July 2025 notice. It was therefore a breach of Mr Jenner’s natural justice r...

2. Cole v Realty Insight Limited [2012] NZWHT Auckland 25 [pdf, 259 KB]

   ...issue in this claim and has to be addressed by a close analysis of the nature of the legal advice given to the claimants by their own conveyancing solicitors. Those solicitors were not involved in the hearing and gave no evidence apart from an affidavit filed in support of their opposition to being joined to the proceedings.11 10 Mckeown Group Limited v Russell above n 5. 11 I conclude that affidavit is admissibl...

3. Tata v Tata - Waiwhakaata 3E 4C Lot 2A Block (Hiiona Marae) [2020] Maori Appellate Court MB 166 (2020 Appeal166) [pdf, 427 KB]

   ...Judge Armstrong concluded: [131] Mrs Martin had personal knowledge of each of these. She knew the arrangement was not recorded in a written agreement. Mrs Martin herself was unable to properly explain or justify the basis of her fee. In her second affidavit, Mrs Martin states she attended the trustee meetings where the payments to her were approved. As such, she would have known that her brother voted in support of those payments. [132] Mrs Martin did not produce the feasibility st...

4. Practice Note 2023 [pdf, 301 KB]

   ...application on notice for a priority fixture 11 may be made, supported by: i. a memorandum setting out the reasons for the application, when the proceeding will be ready for hearing and the likely duration of the hearing; and ii. affidavit evidence which may be relevant to determining whether priority should be granted. (c) Relevant considerations in relation to an application for priority may include: i. why the proceeding should be heard in priority to other...

5. [2023] NZEnvC 211 Masterton District Council [pdf, 782 KB]

   ...orders that specified rules in the proposed Wairarapa Combined District Plan (the proposed plan) have legal effect from the date of public notification of the proposed plan (expected to be 5 October 2023). [2] The application is supported by affidavits of: (a) Solitaire June Robertson, Planning and Regulatory Manager at Carterton District Council; (b) Charles Price Horrell, Consultant Planner contracted by the Wairarapa District Councils; (c) Rodney George Yeoman, Formative,...

6. [2010] NZEmpC 138 George v Auckland Regional Council [pdf, 36 KB]

   ...recruitment of a casual employee in breach of the ARC’s recruitment policy and to concerns about the veracity of explanations Ms George gave in response to that allegation. [4] Ms George’s employment relationship problem (as set out in her affidavit in support of her application for special leave sworn on 11 August 2010) includes claims of unjustified dismissal, unjustified action causing disadvantage, breaches of contract and breaches of the Act. In addition to claiming the...

7. [2012] NZEmpC 149 Edwards v 2 Degrees Mobile Ltd [pdf, 79 KB]

   ...recognisable role or work for the plaintiff to perform at the defendant company and, whilst the plaintiff maintains he is willing to work, in reality, there is no work for him. This is clearly an issue between the parties and there is conflict in the affidavits as to whether work is available. The plaintiff continues to maintain that there is vital work for him to perform and that he needs to remain in employment in order to safeguard his shareholding in the defendant. [18] As...

8. [2012] NZEmpC 127 Hutton and Others v Provenco Cadmus Ltd (in receivership) [pdf, 76 KB]

   ...Court’s discretionary power to grant an application can be based. 9 Mr Skelton explained the reasons underlying the delay in pursuing the application, confirming that they lay squarely at his door. I do not consider that the absence of an affidavit to this effect, which Mr Skelton offered to file if required, is fatal to the application. The reasons for the delay have been explained and drawn to the Court’s attention. The document at issue was before the Authority, and was,...

9. [2009] NZEmpC CC 18/09 Grey v Director-General of Conservation [pdf, 34 KB]

   ...determinative of a matter such as this. However, if the plaintiff has information suggesting otherwise, she may make an interlocutory application to the Court on notice, in which event the defendant will need to supply confirmation of his position on affidavit. [5] The next document or documents sought are “The Gallup poll analysis of staff satisfaction with DOC’s management for 2008 and 2009 with a breakdown showing the satisfaction of staff in the Nelson, Marlborough Conserva...

10. [2015] NZEmpC 212 Go Bus Transport Ltd v Hellyer interlocutory [pdf, 99 KB]

    ...those parties as well as counsel for Go Bus. Chief Judge Colgan will preside over a directions conference on these matters on 7 December 2015. Evidence and submissions of Go Bus [13] The Human Resources Manager of Go Bus, Mr Bardsley, filed an affidavit in support of the company’s application for stay. He deposed that Go Bus is in a financial position to pay the sum ordered by the Authority to Mr Hellyer; and that it would be prepared to pay that sum into Court pending the fin...