Search Results

1. OK Ltd v HO Ltd & BG [2020] NZDT 1519 (21 July 2020) [pdf, 182 KB]

   ...Disputes Tribunal filing fee. 3. The application first came before the Disputes Tribunal on 18 March 2019 where it was adjourned for further hearing until 9 May 2019. On 20 May 2019, the Tribunal ordered HO to pay $5,033.74 to OK Ltd. 4. OK Ltd appealed the decision in the District Court. His Honour Judge Kellar quashed the Tribunal’s decision and ordered a rehearing in the Tribunal to determine the following issues: i. Whether BG agreed that if OK Ltd completed the plumbing...

2. [2021] NZEmpC 133 Ngawaka v Global Security Solutions Ltd [pdf, 186 KB]

   ...is discretionary and broad. In exercising the discretion regard must be had to the overall justice of the case, and the interests of both parties need to be carefully weighed up. The required balancing exercise was summarised by the Court of Appeal at AS McLachlan Ltd v MEL Network Ltd as follows:8 [15] The rule itself contemplates an order for security where the plaintiff will be unable to meet an adverse award of costs. That must be taken as contemplating also that an order...

3. Auckland Standards Committee 2 v Nguy [2021] NZLCDT 26 (21 October 2021) [pdf, 117 KB]

   ...disclosure of files and records. In fact, Mr Nguy was, at the relevant time, able to respond to Mr Collins coherently in his request for documents (11 February 2021), complain about the Law Society investigator (15 March 2021) and give instructions to appeal against early publication of the interim suspension order. [5] Mr Nguy sought to avoid compulsory strike-off by earlier inviting the New Zealand Law Society to remove him from the roll on the basis that being a lawyer was str...

4. [2022] NZEmpC 82 Halse v Employment Relations Authority [pdf, 198 KB]

   ...filed written submissions and Mr Halse also filed an affidavit in support of his application. Accordingly, it is appropriate to now issue a judgment. [6] As noted by Mr Halse, I represented WorkSafe New Zealand in the High Court and Court of Appeal in proceedings brought against it by Ms Osborne.5 It is a matter of public record that the Supreme Court overturned the decision of the Court of Appeal.6 No criticism was made of counsel and the case is completely unrelated to Mr H...

5. [2022] NZEmpC 80 A Labour Inspector of the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment v Samra Holdings Ltd T/A Te Puna Liquor Centre [pdf, 226 KB]

   ...135, [2017] 1 NZLR 310 at [2] in relation to the principle generally; 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 Crimson Consulting Ltd v Berry [2018] NZCA 460, [2019] NZAR 30. (e) the principle of open justice (including the encouragement of fair and accurate reporting of, and comment on, court hearings and decisions): (f) the fre...

6. A Trustees v IAG New Zealand Ltd [2022] CEIT-2019-0078 [pdf, 216 KB]

   ...claim for damages.3 Contractual claims for as incurred legal and expert costs, such as clauses 17.1 and 17.2 of the RSMA, are prima facie enforceable contractual obligations. In Watson & Son Ltd v Active Manuka Honey Association the Court of Appeal stated that the recovery of legal costs under an indemnity provide an alternative to the costs jurisdiction of the Court.4 The question is whether the wording of the indemnity clearly shows agreement to an alternative basis for recovery...

7. [2022] NZEmpC 58 GF v Comptroller of the New Zealand Customs Service [pdf, 192 KB]

   ...in accordance with s 103A of the Employment Relations Act 2000. 5 Smith v Attorney-General [2020] NZHC 836. 6 Benge v Air New Zealand Ltd [2011] NZEmpC 26 at [16]-[18]. [16] I return to principle, as enjoined to do by the Court of Appeal in Price Waterhouse v Fortex Group Ltd:7 In marginal cases, it is better to avoid generalities and rules of thumb, and to return to principle. The pleader and the Court simply ask “in the circumstances of this claim, is that statem...

8. Lawyers-and-Conveyancers-Lawyers-Practice-Rules-Amendment-Regulations-2022FINAL.pdf [pdf, 209 KB]

   ...be based on application process to be developed by the NZLS. 11 An application process will be established, setting out the evidence required to support a lawyer’s application. This process will include notification of outcomes and procedures for appeal. 12 The information will be removed from the publicly available register but remain on record with NZLS. When a member of the public has genuine reasons to access the work details of a lawyer, which have been removed from the register, NZLS...

9. [2023] NZEnvC 022 Selwyn District Council v Thorne [pdf, 450 KB]

   ...at the Site, and make a vehicle crossing application. If the application for resource consent or existing use certificate is declined, then Mr Thorne shall have 30 working days from the date of declination (and resolution of any objections or appeals) to achieve compliance with Order 8(b); or (b) relocate the entrance point for the vehicle crossing entrance point for the driveway at least 10m from the 5 intersection and seal the driveway in accordance with the Council...

10. Edwards - Aramiro and Section 1 Survey Office Plan 61863 (2023) 254 Waikato Maniapoto MB 86 (254 WMN 86) [pdf, 522 KB]

    ...the circumstances. The court may have regard to how the encroachment came to be, the conduct of the parties and any unjustified enrichment due to the wrongly placed structure (s 324). [16] In Barry Park Investments Limited v Johnson, the Court of Appeal noted that in terms of relief for wrongly placed structures, “the scope of remedies available under the [Property Law] Act are extensive”.3 The Court considered that while relief was required to be just and equitable, “orders...