Search Results

1. Johnson v Canterbury/Westland Standards Committee 3 - Outcome of appeal of decisions [2018] NZLCDT 5 and [2018] NZLCDT 21 [pdf, 439 KB]

   ...was a legal matter and not a financial matter. (c) Did not provide independent advice because he did not advise that they should not proceed with the purchase. The Tribunal made no finding to this effect. Mr Eades addressed this issue in the affidavit he swore on 8 August 2017 in response to Mr Haynes’ assertion that the Trust would have had an appropriate remedy against Mr Ed Johnston if he had not been acting in the Trust’s best interests. In any event, Mr Eades’ opini...

2. GO & KO v MD [2025] NZDT 10 (16 April 2025) [pdf, 381 KB]

   ...regarding the claims and the counterclaim, not all of which was relevant to the issues I need to decide. I have taken into account the oral evidence given by various witnesses at the first hearing. I have also taken into account the written statements and affidavits of other witnesses. I would like to assure the parties that I have considered all material information and evidence presented to the Tribunal, however, this order refers only to essential material and is not intended to be a fu...

3. Rau v Stock - Opuatia 9C2B2 (2025) 288 Waikato Maniapoto MB 112 (288 WMN 112) [pdf, 654 KB]

   ...distinct. The Paakau and Puhirua lands also have different kawa associated with them. Puhirua is the kaitiaki of the caves, whereas Paakau are the kaitiaki of the Paakau waterfall. 15 169 Waikato Maniapoto MB 113-130 (169 WMN 113-130). 16 Reply affidavit of Rangitiaho Rau, McCaw Lewis, 2 November 2022 at [8]-[13]. 288 Waikato Maniapoto MB 123 [29] This evidence was unchallenged by the respondents. [30] The two names Puhirua and Paakau have significant meanings to the dif...

4. [2024] NZEmpC 147 MW v Spiga Ltd [pdf, 740 KB]

   MW v SPIGA LIMITED [2024] NZEmpC 147 [8 August 2024] ORDER FOR NON-PUBLICATION OF INFORMATION CONTAINED AT [106] OF THIS JUDGMENT IN THE EMPLOYMENT COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND I TE KŌTI TAKE MAHI O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU [2024] NZEmpC 147 EMPC 20/2023 IN THE MATTER OF a challenge to a determination of the Employment Relations Authority BETWEEN MW Plaintiff AND SPIGA LIMITED Defendant Hearing: 9–10 October 2023 (Heard

5. [2010] NZEmpC 148 Auckland DHB & 20 Other DHB Named in the attached Schedule v NZ Resident Doctors Assoc [pdf, 56 KB]

   ...[15] In this letter, Mr Prior used the term “DHB funding” rather than the term “financial parameters” used in the original statement. The significance of this difference became apparent to the RDA in June 2008 when Dr Powell read an affidavit by Mr Prior filed in the proceedings which were then before the Authority. What Mr Prior said was that, in addition to their general funding, the DHBs had received special funding from the government which was used to settle...

6. [2006] NZEmpC AC 40/06 Saipe v Waitakere Enterprise Trust Board [pdf, 63 KB]

   ...true. Obviously that cannot be so. The defendant will still need to lead sufficient evidence to prove the matters pleaded in the amended statement of defence. In the same way Mr Saipe will need to lead evidence (his suggestion of providing an affidavit will not be acceptable) to prove the matters alleged in his amended statement of claim. The fact remains, however, that unless the parties in this case are left free to choose the evidence to be adduced as they see fit to support...

7. [2015] NZEmpC 118 Nisha v LSG Sky Chefs New Zealand Ltd [pdf, 233 KB]

   ...convenient to address most of them. [22] The first three numbered interrogatories (in effect, seven, once sub-questions are taken into account) all address the question of who is funding the defendant’s defence of these proceedings. [23] In her affidavit (sworn on 23 June 2015) in support of the defendant’s objection, LSG’s Marie Park deposes to the defendant funding its defence of the proceedings itself. That would be sufficient to dispose of those interrogatories but th...

8. Porou - Whareongaonga 5 Trust (2015) 49 Tairawhiti MB 46 (49 TRW 46) [pdf, 311 KB]

   ...considered that the matter had been forced upon him by the Chairperson and another trustee. He did not attend Court. [7] The first hearing was held on 3 September 2014 where I adjourned the application to give time for the applicant to file a detailed affidavit of the reasons why he sought the removal of Mr Kahuroa. I indicated that I was considering a s 240 removal for him and Mr Tahata. 5 [8] The second hearing was held on 24 October 2014 and advertised in the Gisborne Heral...

9. Churton v Trustees of the Mangaporou Trust (2015) 337 Aotea MB 131 (337 AOT 131) [pdf, 219 KB]

   ...direct further research by any party, or by the Registrar from the court records: (g) direct the filing by any party of any valuation, land use, or other report that may assist the court in determining any matter in issue: (h) fix a time by which affidavits or other documents shall be filed: (i) exercise any powers of direction or appointment vested in the court or a Judge by the rules of court in respect of applications of the class with which the Judge is dealing: (j) give s...

10. Larkins v Hurae and Ngawaiata Whānau Trust - Waihou Hutoia D2A (2015) 94 Taitokerau MB 120 (94 TTK 120) [pdf, 226 KB]

    ...already set out, and the Māori Appellate Court directed that the application be heard again by this Court. The rehearing on 28 May 2013 [17] The rehearing took place before me on 28 May 2013. John Kahukiwa appeared for Moa. Mr Kahukiwa filed affidavit evidence from Moa and presented written legal submissions. [18] Mr Kahukiwa pursued a very different argument than that which he argued before the Māori Appellate Court. Mr Kahukiwa’s principal submission was that notwithsta...