Search Results

1. Chee v Stareast Investment Ltd [pdf, 23 KB]

   SUMMARY Case: Chee & Anor v Stareast Investment Ltd & Ors File No: TRI 2008-100-000091/ DBH 05577 Court: WHT Adjudicator: C Ruthe Date of Decision: 21 July 2009 Background The claimants brought a claim regarding their leaky home whereby much of the proposed remedial work was to prevent future possible leaks rather than for the low- level damage recorded to date. The Tribunal was therefore required to make determinations regarding the involvement of the following re

2. [2019] NZEmpC 85 Sawyer v The Vice-Chancellor of Victoria University of Wellington [pdf, 323 KB]

   ...[6] The Vice-Chancellor submitted that usually costs follow the event and, having been successful, an order in his favour ought to be made.7 His claim for indemnity costs relied on Bradbury v Westpac Banking Corp.8 In that case the Court of Appeal referred to non-exhaustive circumstances in which indemnity costs might be awarded as follows:9 3 Employment Court Practice Directions at 18 <www.employmentcourt.govt.nz/legislation-...

3. Jumpjet Synopsis Submission Strike out Dec 2018 [pdf, 84 KB]

   ...bases its logic on the Cost of the project and further splits the project in two sections frequently referring to a decision making process based around the Cost of RESA construction. 8. Thus, the Annexure A submission, before the Director, appeals for Business Case Costs to be included in the CAA decision-making process and therefore the submission is not admissible to these Court proceedings. 3 9. In terms of “practicality" the published principal ICAO aerodrome sta...

4. [2019] NZEmpC 164 Packwood v ANZ Bank New Zealand Ltd [pdf, 202 KB]

   ...NZEmpC 8 at [276]. 7 Chen v Banclogix Ltd [2012] NZEmpC 28. Analysis [10] Clause 19 of sch 3 of the Employment Relations Act 2000 governs the award of costs in this Court. The principles are well established, as set out in Court of Appeal judgments such as Victoria University of Wellington v Alton-Lee;8 Binnie v Pacific Health Ltd;9 and Health Waikato Ltd v Elmsly.10 [11] The primary principle is that costs follow the event. It is well established that the costs disc...

5. [2021] NZEnvC 089 Peter Mawhinney (as a Trustee of Waitakere Forest Land Trust and Forest Trust) v Auckland Council [pdf, 235 KB]

   ...the form titled ‘Application for access to court documents´ endorsed by the purported applicant ‘Ron Law’ ‘Project Manager’ … the application for which the information sought was not as regards any court proceedings as regards ‘an appeal the regarding the Waitakere Proposed District Plan’ (as stated in Step 2 of the application). Consequently, there is no right of access to the documents under s8 or s9 of the District Court (Access to Court Documents) Rules 2017 (‘t...

6. Yuile v Smith - Tuahu 6 (2022) 114 Tairawhiti MB 92 (114 TRW 92) [pdf, 188 KB]

   ...Tukorehe Tribal Committee and Tahamata Incorporation (2014) 319 Aotea MB 238 (319 AOT 238), at [11]. 5 The principal authorities concerning costs are considered in Nicholls v Nicholls - Part Papaaroha 6B Block (2011) Māori Appellate Court MB 64 (2011 APPEAL 64). Those decisions include Riddiford v Te Whaiti (2001) 13 Tākitimu Appellate MB 184 (13 ACTK 184), Manuirirangi v Paraninihi Ki Waitotara Incorporation (2002) 15 Whanganui Appellate MB 64 (15 WGAP 64) and De Loree v Mokomoko a...

7. [2022] NZEmpC 170 Courage v Attorney-General [pdf, 207 KB]

   ...135, [2017] 1 NZLR 310 at [2] in relation to the principle generally; and, in relation to access to Court documents, see the discussion in Commissioner of Police v Doyle [2017] NZHC 3049; and Berry v Crimson Consulting Ltd [2017] NZHC 3026 upheld on appeal in Berry v Crimson Consulting Ltd [2018] NZCA 460. [8] Rule 12 specifies a range of matters that must be considered when determining an application for access. It provides: 12 Matters to be considered In determining a requ...

8. [2022] NZEmpC 49 Butt v Attorney-General [pdf, 184 KB]

   ...contain costs.5 Indemnity costs may be awarded in circumstances where a party has acted vexatiously, frivolously, improperly or unnecessarily in commencing, continuing or defending a proceeding.6 As already noted by the defendants, the Court of Appeal has noted that such circumstances are exceptional and require exceptionally bad behaviour.7 [12] The plaintiffs, in their submissions in reply, have clarified that there is no suggestion that the applications were improper but say that...

9. AMLCFT Stat Review FAQ [pdf, 1.7 MB]

   ...(AML/CFT) Act 2009 helps to keep New Zealand safe from money laundering and terrorism financing. By making it harder for criminals to launder money or finance terrorism, we also make profit-motivated crime, like selling drugs or defrauding people, less appealing and help protect New Zealand from terrorism. Is it important? Money laundering affects all of us. It is happening every day across the country. It’s estimated that over $1 billion a year comes from drug dealing and fraud and...

10. [2024] NZEnvC 062 Gisborne District Council v China Foresty Group New Zealand Company Limited [pdf, 267 KB]

    ...therefore, been responded to. [14] As the High Court described in Safari Construction (2005) Limited v Concept Builders Queenstown Limited:2 Access to documents at the pre-substantive hearing stage is generally limited because, as the Court of Appeal explained in Crimson Consulting v Berry [2018] NZCA 460 at [39]: … when matters are still at the pleading stage, there is an element of unfairness on parties in the publication of one side of the story. The allegations and the stat...