Search Results

1. [2008] NZEmpC CC 4A/08 Sefo v Sealord Shellfish Ltd [pdf, 86 KB]

   ...circumstances a decision to suspend summarily and without inquiry of the affected employee will need to be justified as that term is defined now in s103A of the Act. [34] The severity of suspension from employment was recognised by the Court of Appeal almost 25 years ago in a case involving a probation officer, Birss v Secretary for Justice [1984] 1 NZLR 513. In Birss Richardson J wrote at p521: Suspension is a drastic measure which if more than momentary must have a devastating e...

2. [2012] NZEmpC 211 Service and Food Workers union Nga Ringa Toa & Page v Sealord Group Ltd [pdf, 262 KB]

   ...earlier position that such evidence was only admissible when the words of the agreement were ambiguous or unclear. Indeed, the current state of the law appears to be that in all cases such reference is possible and even desirable. The Court of Appeal has developed the following approach in contract cases. One looks first at the words used — they must obviously be the starting point — and then at the surrounding circumstances to make sure that the first impression of the meaning...

3. Ali v Wang [2015] NZIACDT 2 (22 January 2015) [pdf, 256 KB]

   ...2013-009-001684, 28 January 2014). The two decisions are essentially decisions considering facts, in the High Court both parties took the position that they would not support the District Court’s analysis of the facts; the High Court allowed the appeal on that basis. Accordingly, the decisions do not take the matter beyond the facts of that case. [56] The observation by the District Court, that when something is truly beyond a person’s control it does not trigger professional discip...

4. Paraire v Paraire – Part Mangatawa 10 (2015) 105 Waikato Maniapoto MB 67 (105 WMN 67) [pdf, 213 KB]

   ...in the shed. Otherwise it would have been totally unreasonable to expect Mr Paraire, a man of limited financial resources, to expend such a large amount of money on improving the shed. The law [63] In the case of Gillies v Keogh, the Court of Appeal referred to what are known as the five probanda required to be shown by a party seeking to rely upon the doctrine of proprietary estoppel. 29 [64] Richardson J noted that there had been a trend away from the strict application of...

5. [2013] NZEmpC 82 Tan v Morningstar Institute of Education Ltd t/a Morningstar Preschool [pdf, 177 KB]

   ...Employment Relations Act and, in particular, s 103A in 2004 and as amended in 2010, did affect the previous law about justifications for dismissal on grounds of redundancy but not to the fundamental extent of setting aside everything that the Court of Appeal propounded in GN Hale. [39] I record my complete agreement with the way the Chief Judge has explained the requirements of s 103A in a redundancy dismissal and note it is entirely in accord with the views expressed about tha...

6. [2016] NZEmpC 39 Fox v Hereworth School Trust Board Costs [pdf, 281 KB]

   ...been unable to do so. The plaintiff’s application extends also to costs in the Employment Relations Authority because, although it found in the Hereworth School Trust Board’s (the Board’s) favour, that determination 2 has been reversed on appeal by this Court. [2] The Authority ordered Mrs Fox to pay the Board $21,000 as a contribution towards the defendant’s costs of a three-day Authority investigation in September 1 Fox...

7. La Grouw as Trustee of the GJ Peacocke Trust v Rantin & MRA Architects Ltd [2011] NZWHT Auckland 8 [pdf, 178 KB]

   ...doors leading onto the deck, and Page | 11 membrane failure on the deck. DID MR WATSON BREACH HIS DUTY OF CARE TO MS LA GROUW? [25] In North Shore City Council v Body Corporate 188529 & Ors (Sunset Terraces),1 the Court of Appeal upheld Heath J‟s conclusion that councils, in issuing building consents, and designers, in preparing the plans, are entitled to assume that a reasonable builder would have access to, and rely on, the manufacturer‟s specifications,...

8. Tank Trust v Auckland Council & Anor [2013] NZWHT Auckland 15 [pdf, 237 KB]

   ...is what would restore the claimant to the position held before the tort was committed. [67] Diminution in value was the measure of loss applied by the High Court in Altimarloch in relation to the claim against the Council, the Court of Appeal saw no reason to depart from this approach11 and the Supreme 8 Cao v Auckland City Council HC Auckland, CIV-2010-404-7093, 18 May 2011. 9 Johnson v Auckland Council [2013] NZH...

9. Overview Trustee Ltd as trustee of the Carrigafoyle Trust v Cook & Anor as trustees of the CC Trust [2011] NZWHT Auckland 35 [pdf, 309 KB]

   ...will be shared if the proceedings fail. [144] The ratio was that when a non party promotes and funds proceedings by an insolvent company solely or substantially for its own benefit it should be liable for the costs if the claim or defence or appeal fails.[29] Page | 32 [145] It appears in this matter that the claimant did not have the funding to pursue the case even after the Calderbank offer. [146] This present case clearly falls into the category of a major s...

10. Complaints Assessment Committee 409 v Andrew Rankin [2017] NZREADT 59 [pdf, 234 KB]

    ...directions conference will then be scheduled to make any necessary timetable orders. [95] Pursuant to s 113 of the Real Estate Agents Act 2008, the Tribunal draws the parties’ attention to s 116 of the Real Estate Agents Act 2008, which sets out appeal rights. Any appeal must be filed in the High Court within 20 working days of the date on which the Tribunal’s decision is served. The procedure to be followed is set out in part 20 of the High Court Rules. ___________...