Search Results

1. Thorogood v Accident Compensation Corporation (Cover) [2025] NZACC 115 (17 July 2025) [pdf, 301 KB]

   IN THE DISTRICT COURT AT WELLINGTON I TE KŌTI-Ā-ROHE KI TE WHANGANUI-A-TARA [2025] NZACC 115 ACAR 106/24 UNDER THE ACCIDENT COMPENSATION ACT 2001 IN THE MATTER OF AN APPEAL UNDER SECTION 149 OF THE ACT BETWEEN GEORGIA THOROGOOD Appellant AND ACCIDENT COMPENSATION CORPORATION Respondent Hearing: 25 June 2025 Appearances: H Peart for the Appellant F Becroft for the Corporation Judgment: 17 July 2025 RESERVED JUDGMENT OF JUDGE...

2. [2012] NZEmpC 29 Tourism Holdings Limited (trading as CI Munro) v Charlesworth [pdf, 138 KB]

   ...principles which the Authority should take into account, observed that without prejudice offers can be taken into account. [37] The full Court concluded that the Authority is not bound 11 by the costs principles set down by the three Court of Appeal decisions in Binnie v Pacific Health Limited, 12 Health Waikato Ltd v Elmsly, 13 and Victoria University of Wellington v Alton-Lee. 14 Those cases apply to the Employment Court, not to the Employment Relations Authority....

3. Walters v CAC303 & Anor [2015] NZREADT 43 [pdf, 167 KB]

   BEFORE THE REAL ESTATE AGENTS DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL [2015] NZREADT 43 READT 082/14 IN THE MATTER OF an appeal under s.111 of the Real Estate Agents Act 2008 BETWEEN JOHN WALTERS Appellant AND REAL ESTATE AGENTS AUTHORITY (per CAC 303) First respondent AND MRS BEVERLEY McLEAY & MS TREEN McLEAY Second respondents MEMBERS OF TRIBUNAL Judge P F Barber - Chairperson Mr G Denley - Member Ms N Dangen - Member HEARD at TAURANGA on 8 May...

4. Millward & Anor v CAC304 & Anor [2015] NZREADT 58 [pdf, 175 KB]

   BEFORE THE REAL ESTATE AGENTS DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL [2015] NZREADT 58 READT 105/14 IN THE MATTER OF an appeal under s.111 of the Real Estate Agents Act 2008 BETWEEN IAN AND CHRISTINE MILLWARD Appellants AND REAL ESTATE AGENTS AUTHORITY (CAC 304) First respondent AND ZANE COZENS Second respondent MEMBERS OF TRIBUNAL Judge P F Barber - Chairperson Mr J Gaukrodger - Member Ms N Dangen - Member HEARD at TAUPO on 1 July 2015 DATE OF...

5. [2016] NZEmpC 22 Keerithi Merennage v Ritchies Transport Holdings Limited [pdf, 182 KB]

   ...party. Consideration is then given to whether those actual costs were reasonable. If so the general approach is recovery of 66 per cent, subject to adjustment. This contrasts with the approach adopted under the High Court scale. As the Court of Appeal observed in Health Waikato v Elmsly 14 under the current High Court costs regime the actual level of costs incurred is irrelevant for general purposes. [32] The actual costs incurred by a party in litigation are affected by a...

6. NT v Standards Committee LCRO 131/2014 (21 November 2014) [pdf, 84 KB]

   ...decision to refer the matter to the Disciplinary Tribunal. [26] The role of this Office, when considering a review of a decision to lay charges against a practitioner before the Disciplinary Tribunal was the subject of comment by the Court of Appeal in Orlov v New Zealand Law Society21 where it observed that “[t]here is now oversight of the referral decision by the Independent LCRO”.22 [27] The Court also found there was no threshold test to meet before matters could be referr...

7. AZ v ZT LCRO 100/2013 (6 May 2014) [pdf, 173 KB]

   ...has broad powers to conduct her own investigations, including the power to exercise for that purpose all the powers of a Standards Committee or an investigator, and seek and receive evidence. The statutory power of review is much broader than an appeal and gives the LCRO discretion as to the approach to be taken on any particular review and 3 Application for review dated 14 April 2013. 4 Standards Committee determination dated 1 Marc...

8. [2018] NZEnvC 039 Waterfront Watch Incorporated v Wellington City Council [pdf, 1 MB]

   ...KOOTI TAIAO 0 AOTEAROA IN THE MATTER BETWEEN AND AND AND Court: Environment Judge C J Thompson Environment Commissioner I A Buchanan Environment Commissioner J R Mills Decision No: [2018] NZEnvC 3q ENV-2016-WLG-000062 & 064 of appeals under section 120 of the Resource Management Act 1991 WATERFRONT WATCH INCORPORATED and MICHAEL PETER CECIL GIBSON Appellants WELLINGTON CITY COUNCIL Respondent WELLINGTON CITY COUNCIL - BUILD WELLINGTON Applicant WELLINGTON...

9. [2017] NZEmpC 4 Marx v Southern Cross Campus Board of Trustees [pdf, 137 KB]

   ...appropriate, including weighing both parties’ interests and the broader public interest in the finality of litigation. The overriding consideration is to avoid a miscarriage of justice. 7 The applicable principles were discussed by the Court of Appeal in Ports of Auckland Ltd v New Zealand Waterfront Workers Union. 8 As the Court of Appeal confirmed, the mere possibility of a miscarriage of justice is not a sufficient ground for granting a rehearing. 9 What is required is an...

10. LCRO 105/2020 AG v BH & CI (19 February 2021) [pdf, 179 KB]

    ...Mr DJ asserted a lien over the [ABC] and made application to have Ms AG’s company liquidated. [6] Mr DJ failed in his application, but Ms AG was ordered to pay into court the sum claimed by the company. [7] Steps were being taken by Mr DJ to appeal the court’s decision. Mr DJ was directed to pay costs. [8] Ms AG applied to bankrupt Mr DJ when he failed to pay costs ordered by the court. Her bankruptcy application was successful. Mr DJ responded with an application to have...