Search Results

1. Auckland Standards Committee 5 v Barton [2020] NZLCDT 28 (10 September 2020) [pdf, 143 KB]

   ...[24]. 7 Ibid, 92 at [25]. 8 Ibid, 94 at [35]. 9 Ibid, 93 at [31]. 10 Ibid 11 Ibid, at [29]. 6 [17] Among Ms Barton’s attempts to deflect responsibility was her theme that the workplace was toxic. The weight of evidence, several affidavits from co-workers, indicates her view as singular. From her subjective standpoint, perhaps she felt unsure of her position. That might explain the oddness of such risky behaviour in someone so senior. Clearly, she found herself una...

2. [2023] NZEmpC 95 VMR v Aviation Security Service Division of Civil Aviation Authority [pdf, 257 KB]

   ...which 8 GF v OO [2022] NZEmpC 1 at [20]. at that time were before the Authority, and that AvSec would not make an application for costs in the Authority following dismissal of the applications for interim reinstatement. (b) A lengthy affidavit from a medical practitioner (Dr Febery) was largely irrelevant and led to an escalation of costs. [24] On the first point, there is some force in the hindsight assessment that the AVOs may well have been better off had they acce...

3. [2024] NZEmpC 88 Henderson Travels Ltd v Kaur [pdf, 232 KB]

   ...business that was previously run by Henderson Travels. (e) Henderson Travels is unlikely to be able to satisfy the judgment or pay any costs. (f) It is just in all the circumstances that Flight Experts be joined. [8] Ms Kaur provided a supporting affidavit. She referred to the Authority’s cost award in her favour remaining unpaid, as is the balance of the Court’s judgment sum despite a demand for payment having been made.7 She said that Flight Experts continues to operate...

4. Rautangata v Rautangata - Opuatia No 6D No 2D Block (2011) 27 Waikato Maniapoto MB 252 (27 WMN 252) [pdf, 137 KB]

   ...monies from the BNZ in November 1998. I am satisfied however that the evidence Mrs Rautangata gave about the building costs, and how they were paid for is correct. Respondents’ Evidence [20] The evidence offered by the respondents was by way of affidavit only. None of the deponents appeared at the hearing and so were unable to be cross-examined. Ample notice of the hearing was given so that it cannot be said that the deponents did not have the opportunity to appear. 27 Wa...

5. Waters v Alpine Energy Ltd (Discovery No. 2) [2015] NZHRRT 7 [pdf, 73 KB]

   ...judgment [4] It is to be recalled two positions were advertised by Alpine Energy. The first was “Engineering Officer – New Connections” and the second “Maintenance Engineer”. Mr Waters applied unsuccessfully for both positions. In an affidavit sworn on 17 March 2014 Mr SM Small, Compliance Training Manager, deposed that no appointment was in fact made to the Maintenance Engineer position. In the High Court Mr JN Carter swore an affidavit dated 20 May 2014 identifying himsel...

6. UF v OU LCRO 90 / 2011 (20 March 2013) [pdf, 118 KB]

   ...barristers, and CCS Chambers was instructed. UF was briefed to act on the criminal charges, and UG was briefed on the civil proceedings. OU continued to act for the company and WR. [5] At the time UG was briefed, the time allocated for filing affidavit evidence had passed. UG formed the view that further evidence was necessary and made an application to file further evidence out of time. In support of that application he filed an affidavit by ZB. [6] In the memorandum in suppo...

7. [2017] NZEnvC 155 J Evans v ADL Properties Ltd [pdf, 2.4 MB]

   ...those misunderstandings had been pointed out, a reasonable parry, acting in good faith, would have reflected on the wisdom of pursuing the application. 15 ADL also notes that the court was not presented with any evidence from 8 9 10 11 12 Affidavit of C J Barnes, dated 11 May 2017, at [5]. Affidavit of C J Barnes, dated 11 May 2017, at [6]. Affidavit of C J Barnes, dated 11 May 2017, at [19]. Affidavit of C J Barnes, dated 11 May 2017, at [20]. Affidavit of J P Evans, dated 19...

8. Cooper v Corrections [2019] NZHRRT 23 [pdf, 201 KB]

   ...of Mr Cooper for substitution of a community-based sentence in lieu of a disqualification under s 94 of the Land Transport Act 1998 (LTA) in the District Court at Papakura. This application placed reliance on Mr Cooper’s employment with STS. An affidavit by Mr Cooper filed in support of the application annexed his offer of employment from STS dated 10 January 2014. [8] Mr Cooper’s file was transferred from the Papakura Service Centre to the Mangere Service Office. On 24 Februar...

9. Director of Human Rights Proceedings v Commissioner of Police (Discovery) [2020] NZHRRT 32 [pdf, 202 KB]

   ...new hearing date of 5 October 2020. The application [5] As mentioned a fourth statement of claim was filed by the DoHRP on 8 June 2020 together with the present application for further and better discovery which is supported by submissions and an affidavit sworn on 3 February 2020 by a legal executive in his employ, annexing correspondence between the DoHRP and the lawyers representing the Commissioner. That correspondence spans the period from 5 August 2019 to 29 January 2020. [6]...

10. Sherard v Devereux and others - Otakanini Māori Reservatio (Haranui Marae) (2016) 140 Taitokerau MB 60 (140 TTK 60) [pdf, 243 KB]

    ...Robertson argues that the trustees are undertaking important work carrying out the renovations of the Marae which is for the benefit of all of the beneficiaries and they should be allowed to continue with that work. [22] Mr Robertson relies on affidavits from Carole Povey, Tracey Hill, and Denise Hohepa-Hapeta. [23] There is merit in Mr Robertson’s argument. The trustees have the power and the obligation to administer the reservation for the benefit of the beneficiaries. This is...