Search Results

1. [2007] NZEmpC WC 11/07 Smith v Nga Kairauhii Trust [pdf, 52 KB]

   ...materially as follows. [13] On 14 September 2006 Ms Smith’s solicitor wrote to her enclosing a copy of the Authority’s determination dated 11 September 2006 under cover of a letter that simply asked her to contact Mr Petherick “to discuss an appeal.” Having received the solicitor’s letter on 16 September, Ms Smith telephoned the lawyer’s office on 18 September attempting to make an appointment with Mr Petherick but was unable to do so and her telephone message was not r...

2. [2010] NZEmpC 36 T & L Harvey Ltd v Duncan [pdf, 49 KB]

   ...discretion to make orders as to costs but, as with all such discretions, it must be exercised judicially and in accordance with principle. The key principles applicable to the Court’s discretion to award costs have been set out by the Court of Appeal in three very well known decisions: Victoria University of Wellington v Alton-Lee2, Binnie v Pacific Health Ltd3 and Health Waikato Ltd v Elmsly.4 [5] The fundamental purpose of an award of costs is to recompense a party who has be...

3. [2009] NZEmpC AC 27A/09 NZ Amalgamated Engineering Printing & Manufacturing & Ors v Zeal 320 Ltd & Anor [pdf, 40 KB]

   ...disbursements inclusive. [5] Mr Caisley’s memorandum on behalf of Zeal referred to the Court’s power to award costs in schedule 3 clause 19 of the Employment Relations Act 2000 (“the Act”) and the leading authorities, including the three Court of Appeal cases of Victoria University of Wellington v Alton-Lee1, Binnie v Pacific Health Limited2 and Health Waikato v Elmsly3. He submitted that the primary principle is that costs should follow the event, a proposition which Mr...

4. Taueki v Horowhenua Sailing Club Ltd - Horowhenua Lake 11 (Lake) Māori Reservation (2015) 337 Aotea MB 68 (337 AOT 68) [pdf, 158 KB]

   ...claim is frivolous and/or vexatious; and (d) It would be an abuse of the process of the Māori Land Court to allow the claim to proceed in all the circumstances. [8] Mr Cameron submitted that, in accordance with earlier findings of the Court of Appeal, Mr Taueki did not have standing to bring a claim in nuisance or trespass. As Mr Taueki is a beneficial owner of the land, which is otherwise vested in trustees, he did not legally have actual control or possessory rights over the lan...

5. [2013] NZEmpC 141 2Air NZ Ltd v Kerr [pdf, 88 KB]

   ...(2) Nothing in regulations 40 to 52 applies to any action for the recovery of a penalty. [9] In terms of relevance, both parties accepted that the leading authority regarding relevance in the Employment Court is the decision of the Court of Appeal in Airways Corporation of New Zealand Ltd v Postles. 2 In that case, the Employment Court had ordered the plaintiff to discover and produce for inspection all documents containing the development, operation and review of a certain e...

6. [2014] NZEmpc 85 McCartney v Atlas Concrete Ltd and First Union [pdf, 107 KB]

   ...for dealing with the complaint. 55.4 This process should include participation of a National Executive sub-committee made up of an appropriate number of executive members. 55.5 Any decision of the sub-committee which affects a member may be appealed by either party to the National Executive. 55.6 Any such member shall notify the National Secretary in writing of his/her dissatisfaction with the sub-committee’s decision. The relevant Secretary shall compile a report which shall...

7. [2014] NZEmpC 212 Cudby & Meade Ltd v New Zealand Furniture, Manufacturing and Associated Workers’ Union Inc [pdf, 99 KB]

   ...decided to proceed without the records. The application [10] The grounds specified in the application for leave to file the challenge out of time are stated in these terms: 1. At all material times it was apparent the Plaintiff wanted to appeal as an appeal was lodged with the Employment Court as required but the appeal was hand written and was not acceptable to the Employment Court and despite being re handwritten by a third party was still not acceptable. 2. The direc...

8. Mr G v REAA Registrar [2013] NZREADT 15 [pdf, 66 KB]

   BEFORE THE REAL ESTATE AGENTS DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL [2013] NZREADT 15 READT 065/12 IN THE MATTER OF an appeal under s.112 of the Real Estate Agents Act 2008 BETWEEN MR G Applicant AND REGISTRAR OF THE REAL ESTATE AGENTS AUTHORITY Respondent MEMBERS OF TRIBUNAL Ms K Davenport – Chairperson Mr J Gaukrodger – Member Mr G Denley – Member HEARD AT QUEENSTOWN 25 January 2013 DATE OF THIS DECISION: 19 February 2013...

9. LCRO 257-2016 KN v TH and HK [pdf, 116 KB]

   ...scope of review [17] The nature and scope of a review have been discussed by the High Court, which said of the process of review under the Act:1 … the power of review conferred upon Review Officers is not appropriately equated with a general appeal. The obligations and powers of the Review Officer as described in the Act create a very particular statutory process. The Review Officer has broad powers to conduct his or her own investigations including the power to exercise for tha...

10. Toiloloi v Letalu [2014] NZIACDT 93 (18 September 2014) [pdf, 193 KB]

    ...in the decision upholding the complaint. [2] In essence the grounds of the complaint were: [2.1] The adviser accepted his instructions and took fees of $800. [2.2] He did not complete the client engagement process. [2.3] He did not lodge an appeal, but dishonestly told his client he had done so. [2.4] He did not treat the unearned fee as client funds and instead took the money. [2.5] When his licence expired, he did nothing to protect his client. [3] The Tribunal found Mr Letalu...