Search Results

1. [2019] NZEmpC 147 Baker v Hauraki Rail Trail Ltd [pdf, 273 KB]

   ...obligations of good faith in section 4 of the Employment Relations Act 2000. The second and third defendants deliberately subverted the determination and orders made by member Crichton in August 2015. (c) The grounds on which the plaintiff makes the appeal to include the second and third defendant in reopening of the investigation are breaches of the Crimes Act 1961 s111, the Employment Relations Act 2000, s134A(1) and section 4. In addition, the plaintiff seeks a compliance or...

2. Hutana - Estate of Te Whe Ariki Hutana (2019) 57 Te Waipounamu MB 27 (57 TWP 27) [pdf, 320 KB]

   ...applications before this Court concerning the estate. On 14 February 2019, Judge Reeves issued a preliminary determination regarding who is entitled to succeed to Te Whe Ariki Hutana’s Māori land interests under her will.1 Huia Williamson has appealed that preliminary determination, and the applicant in the extant proceedings, Waka Nathan Hutana, has applied for a rehearing. Both applications remain live. [3] On 11 June 2019, I heard two applications in relation to the estate....

3. 2021-05-19 Dr Royden Somerville - Memorandum of Amicus Curiae [pdf, 180 KB]

   ...Limited v lnvercargill City Council [1991) 1 NZLR 86 (CA) at 90; refer also J F Burrows & RI Carter, above, at 278 and 282-285. Resource Management Bill, Explanatory Note, at page xii. 8 28. Part 15 of the RMA was considered by the Court of Appeal in Hilder v Port Otago Ltd. 15 The Court stated: 16 As to be expected in such major and far-reaching legislation, the Resource Management Act contains extensive savings and transitional provisions. Although Part XV is entitled "...

4. 2021-05-19 Dr Royden Somerville - Memorandum of Amicus Curiae [pdf, 180 KB]

   ...Limited v lnvercargill City Council [1991) 1 NZLR 86 (CA) at 90; refer also J F Burrows & RI Carter, above, at 278 and 282-285. Resource Management Bill, Explanatory Note, at page xii. 8 28. Part 15 of the RMA was considered by the Court of Appeal in Hilder v Port Otago Ltd. 15 The Court stated: 16 As to be expected in such major and far-reaching legislation, the Resource Management Act contains extensive savings and transitional provisions. Although Part XV is entitled "...

5. [2021] NZEnvC 169 Prime Property Group Limited v Wellington City Council [pdf, 261 KB]

   BEFORE THE ENVIRONMENT COURT I TE KOTI TAIAO O AOTEAROA IN THE MATTER BETWEEN AND AND Decision No [2021] NZEnvC J6CJ ENV-2020-WLG-000038 of an appeal under s120 of the Resource Management Act 1991 PRIME PROPERTY GROUP LIMITED Appellant WELLINGTON CITY COUNCIL Respondent WAKA KOTAHI NEW ZEALAND TRANSPORT AGENCY Section 27 4 Party Court: Alternate Environment Judge C J Thompson Environment Commissioner D J Bunting Hearing: at Wellington 27, 28 September 2021 Clo...

6. [2022] NZACC 97 – Gimenez v ACC (19 May 2022) [pdf, 246 KB]

   ACR 248/18 IN THE DISTRICT COURT AT WELLINGTON I TE KŌTI-Ā-ROHE KI TE WHANGANUI-A-TARA [2022] NZACC 97 ACR 284/18 UNDER THE ACCIDENT COMPENSATION ACT 2001 IN THE MATTER OF AN APPEAL UNDER SECTION 149 OF THE ACT BETWEEN ALEJANDRO GIMENEZ Appellant AND ACCIDENT COMPENSATION CORPORATION Respondent Hearing: 29 April 2022 Heard at: Christchurch/ Ōtautahi Appearances: Appellant in person (via AVL) Mr C Light for the Respondent...

7. [2024] NZREADT 12 – CAC 2106 v City Realty (24 April 2024) [pdf, 125 KB]

   ...cooperation with the Committee, resulting it a fine of $7,500 to $9,000. DISCUSSION [42] Both counsel have referred to other penalty decisions, being Burnett, Optimize Realty10 and AJS Rental Realty. [43] In Burnett, the Tribunal considered an appeal against a fine of $2,000, ordered by a Complaints Assessment Committee against Mr Burnett’s company, following the Committee’s finding of unsatisfactory conduct. Mr Burnett’s company had failed to provide monthly reconciliati...

8. [2024] NZEmpC 109 LDJ v EZC [pdf, 249 KB]

   ...Board of Trustees [2021] NZEmpC 109 at [5]–[6] and QDY v Counties Manukau District Health Board [2022] NZEmpC 117, [2022] ERNZ 434 at [20] noting the care that is required in interpreting and applying the obiter statements made by the Court of Appeal in Labour Inspector v Gill Pizza Ltd [2020] NZCA 192, [2021] ERNZ 237 at [48]. 9 Johnston, above n 6, at [30]–[33]. (c) If so, is this an appropriate case for removal? Submissions [17] The applicant submits that Quest...

9. [2023] NZREADT 24 - CAC 2103 v Lieven (21 August 2023) [pdf, 242 KB]

   ...to harass the tenants and was a direct threat. [19] The TT ordered the landlords, being Ms Lieven and HH, to pay the tenants $1,520.44. This consisted of $500 compensation, $1,000 in exemplary damages, and a filing fee. [20] Ms Lieven and HH appealed the TT decision to the [court] which dismissed the appeal and found that:2 (a) the Tenancy Adjudicator was correct to find that Ms Lieven breached her obligations under s 38(1) of the RTA by not giving notice of specific times of a...

10. Auckland Standards Committee 4 v O'Boyle [2025] NZLCDT 12 (10 March 2025) [pdf, 203 KB]

    ...Committee5, both of which were resolved at Standards Committee level without the aggravating features of this case. Morahan v Wellington Standards Committee 26 was graver than the present case, resulting in suspension of four months (upheld on appeal). [15] Ms O’Boyle’s disciplinary record of five adverse findings, demonstrates that the current breach falls within a pattern of inappropriate conduct extending for several years. Between 2017 and 2018, she failed to treat a fello...