Search Results

1. [2011] NZEmpC 129 Patel v Pegasus Stations Ltd [pdf, 95 KB]

   ...approach to strike out applications, apart from the evidence taken as to means, there is no evidence before the Court other than the pleadings, the initial documentation filed in the Authority and the correspondence referred to in [9] above. A brief affidavit was filed on behalf of the defendant on the day of the hearing which related to the application for a stay. The Court has not sighted Mr Patel’s employment agreement or any other relevant documentation such as the defendant...

2. [2011] NZEmpC 143 NZ Meat Workers & Related Trades Union Inc v CMP Rangitikei Ltd [pdf, 113 KB]

   ...opposition to the plaintiff’s application which it did. [3] This judgment does not determine substantively the rights and obligations of the parties and the lawfulness of the lockouts. It has been brought on for hearing urgently and evidence on affidavit alone has been considered by the Court. There has been no opportunity for any of the usual elements of a trial including the filing of a statement of defence, disclosure of the relevant documents between parties, cross- examina...

3. [2015] NZEmpC 178 Twentyman v The Warehouse Ltd interlocutory [pdf, 116 KB]

   ...automatically the execution of the Authority’s orders. 5 [16] Ms Twentyman’s opposition to the application for security for costs is contained principally in the form of a memorandum to the Court rather than the expected notice of opposition and affidavit in support. Ms Twentyman’s (therefore 5 See Employment Relations Act 2000, s 180. unsworn) grounds for opposition include that she is currently not working; is re...

4. Kotahitanga Log Haulage Ltd v Forest Distribution Ltd - Mangaroa and other Blocks incorporated (2015) 126 Waiāriki MB 14 (126 WAR 14) [pdf, 245 KB]

   ...costs and disbursements. [13] Costs are also sought in respect of the discontinuance of the cause of action against Mangaroa & Other Blocks Incorporated (“the Incorporation”). The respondents prepared a statement of defence and accompanying affidavits in a response to the claim against the Incorporation. The applicants discontinued that claim in its amended statement of claim dated 29 January 2015. [14] Counsel for the respondents seek costs on a 2B basis in respect of this...

5. [2015] NZEmpC 232 Bidvest New Zealand Limited v FIRST Union Inc reasons for interlocutory [pdf, 132 KB]

   ...merits. In these circumstances, there are three tests that the Court must apply. 5 [11] First, it must be satisfied that there is an arguable case that the plaintiff will succeed at trial. This is done on the basis of pleadings and untested affidavit evidence. [12] Second, and if so, the Court must determine where the balance of convenience will lie between the parties for that period. That means, in effect, whether it will be more just to stop the intended strike action in...

6. Gemmell v Gemmell - Mohaka A4 Trust (2014) 32 Takitimu MB 174 (32 TKT 174) [pdf, 245 KB]

   ...made on the basis of events and inactions and actions from 3 May 2005. [19] Further, counsel for the respondent asks that costs be awarded against Sam Gemmell in favour of Arthur Gemmell on the basis that it has been necessary to provide the affidavit and submissions in opposition to the costs action. 32 Tākitimu MB 179 The Law [20] Section 79(1) of Te Ture Whenua Act 1993 provides: 79 Orders as to costs (1) In any proceedings, the court may make such order as it thin...

7. Taukiri – Parish of Karamu Lot 197A (2013) 52 Waikato Maniapoto MB 294 (52 WMN 294) [pdf, 134 KB]

   ...present application came about because Kevin Taukiri contacted NZRPT to discuss issues relating to the ownership of the block. Representatives of NZRPT were invited to attend a hui with Mr Taukiri and others on 14 April 2012 but, according to the affidavit filed by James Wright for NZRPT, it was decided that NZRPT would not send a representative to the hui as it was assumed that the issues under discussion related only to 20% share of the block owned by the Māori owners. [21] Trev...

8. Waikato Bay of Plenty Standards Committee v Parlane [2011] NZLCDT 3 [pdf, 125 KB]

   ...are set out in a Schedule filed with the Tribunal on 6 October 2010. We consider those expenses reasonable. [28] Following the decision to lay charges, the Standards Committee retained counsel to finalise the charges, brief evidence and finalise affidavits, prepare and lay charges and supporting material, and to represent the committee before the Tribunal. There was also a formal review, relating to the investigation and preliminary findings, which was argued before the Legal Complaints...

9. Auckland Standards Committee v Johnston [2013] NZLCDT 30 [pdf, 182 KB]

   ...investigation into the complaint, the Standards Committee required the Practitioner to furnish documentation in relation to the investigator. The Practitioner knowingly failed to do so. 42 The Standards Committee further relies upon grounds appearing in the affidavits of Stephanie McGregor and Stephen Howard Barter.

10. [2014] NZEmpC 15 Mattingly v Strata Title Management Ltd [pdf, 98 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. ... Inevitably, a Judge of the Court deciding a challenge can never be as well informed about events as the member of the Authority who conducted the investigation but I can see no realistic means...