Search Results

1. [2025] NZEmpC 23  LAF v MEC & NIR [pdf, 217 KB]

   ...Kang v Saena Co Ltd:4 [41] The burden is on the plaintiff to satisfy the Court that there is a prospect that the assets will be removed, dissipated or diminished in value. The test is not unduly exacting. In Murren v Schaeffer the Court of Appeal considered this aspect of the test and commented: “The second stage requires the Court to be satisfied there is a danger that judgment will not be satisfied because assets may be removed or dealt with in a way that frustrates the judgm...

2. [2025] NZEmpC 61 Faitala and Vea v The Pacific Island Business Development Trust [pdf, 178 KB]

   ...granted. Impact on ability to bring her challenge [16] The evidence before the Court supports Mrs Vea’s submission that if security for costs is ordered, Mrs Vea will be prevented from being able to proceed with her challenge. The Court of Appeal in McLachlan v MEL Network Ltd has noted that where an order will have that effect, it “should be made only after careful consideration and in a case in which the claim has little chance of success. Access to the courts for a genuin...

3. [2025] NZEmpC 115  Otira Stagecoach Hotel Limited v Wright  [pdf, 162 KB]

   ...statement of evidence Mr Wright relied on in the Authority and of a report by Dr Olive Webb who is a registered clinical psychologist. In relation to Dr Webb’s statement, Mr Rowntree advised me that it was relevant to the prospect of pursuing an appeal, presumably in the High Court, arising from Judge Rollo’s decision. [16] I have also received evidence from Robin Nicholl. Mr Nicholl is a retired senior police officer who is now a licensed private investigator. In March 2024,...

4. Moke - Succession to Te Poroa Joseph Malcolm (2025) 339 Waiariki MB 182 (339 WAR 182) [pdf, 230 KB]

   ...under s 244, the Court cannot exercise its powers unless satisfied that there is a sufficient degree of support for the variation amongst beneficiaries. 2 Larkins v Kataia – Waihou Hutoia D2A Block [2013] Māori Appellate Court MB 159 (2013 APPEAL 159) at [19] – [28]. 339 Waiariki MB 187 [17] Taking into account both the level of support, and the difficulty in taking into account the views of beneficiaries when only Kāwai can vote, I will not accept a term where only...

5. PSPLA-individual-licence-annual-return-smart-form-July-2025.pdf [pdf, 497 KB]

   ...section 65 of the Land Transport Act 1998, or an earlier equivalent provision?  Yes  No Have you ever been ordered by a New Zealand court to be imprisoned following conviction for an offence and that conviction or order has not been quashed on appeal?  Yes  No In the last 7 years, have you ever been convicted by a New Zealand court of an offence under the Private Security Personnel and Private Investigators Act 2010 or Private Investigators and Security Guards Act 1974 for...

6. Practice directions, legislation & rules

   ...Extend Time to File Documents; 8: Search and Freezing Orders; 11: Amended Challenges Incorporating Costs Determinations; 14: Prosecutions for Offences Under Employment Relations Act 2000; and 15: Sealed Judgments and Certificates of Judgment for Appeals and Other Purposes.

   Located in:

   1. Employment Court

7. [2025] NZREADT 31 – Green v REAA (30 July 2025) [pdf, 208 KB]

   ...Applicant’s application for review of the Registrar’s decision is dismissed and the Registrar’s decision is confirmed. [36] Pursuant to s 113 of the Act, the Tribunal draws the parties’ attention to s 116 of Act, which sets out the right of appeal to the High Court. The procedure to be followed is set out in part 20 of the High Court Rules 2016. ___________________ C Sandelin Deputy Chairperson ___________________ G Denley Member __________________...

8. Measuring reoffending with court data: proposed tier 1 specification [pdf, 750 KB]

   ...relatively complex to describe for users of Tier 1 statistics and to maintain as an ongoing system for producing statistics. Nevertheless such methods are used (eg probably in Scotland, The Scottish Government, 2013). The second option is more appealing conceptually and consistent with some current Corrections measures (eg re- imprisonment rate of released prisoners). However, for Tier 1 purposes we recommend against such complications. First, this complicates the calculation and ex...

9. [2012] NZEmpC 110 de Bruin v Canterbury DH [pdf, 199 KB]

   DE BRUIN V CANTERBURY DISTRICT HEALTH BOARD NZEmpC CHCH [2012] NZEmpC 110 [11 July 2012] IN THE EMPLOYMENT COURT CHRISTCHURCH [2012] NZEmpC 110 CRC 4/12 IN THE MATTER OF a challenge to a determination of the Employment Relations Authority BETWEEN KEES DE BRUIN Plaintiff AND CANTERBURY DISTRICT HEALTH BOARD Defendant Hearing: 5-7 June 2012 (Heard at Christchurch) Counsel: Andrew McKenzie, counsel for the plaintiff Penny Shaw, counsel fo

10. Evesham v Auckland Standards Committee LCRO 136 / 2009 (5 November 2009) [pdf, 190 KB]

    ...legislation or rules that the practitioner may have breached. In this regard the reliance on Kollar v Civil Aviation Authority (14 May 1997, High Court, Christchurch, John Hansen J, AP76/97) was misplaced. That in that case the defendant successfully appealed a summary conviction for breaching the Civil Aviation Regulations. The charges flowed from a ballooning accident in which three people died. That kind of proceeding has little in common with a professional disciplinary process. I...