14606 items matching your search terms
...respondent or to others with a legitimate interest in the outcome. The Supreme Court went on to say that: “[w]here there is significant delay coupled with significant prejudice, then it may well be appropriate to refuse leave even though the appeal appears to be strongly arguable.”10 8 An Employee v An Employer [2007] ERNZ 295 (EmpC) at [9]. 9 Almond v Read [2017] NZSC 80, [2017] 1 NZLR 801. 10 At [38](d). [23]...
...costs. [51] However, the inquiry does not start and stop with the assessment of actual costs.36 In George the Court considered whether a contractual indemnity involved any discretion under cl 19(1) of sch 3 to the Act.37 Applying the Court of Appeal’s decision in Watson & Son Ltd v Active Manuka Honey Association, the Court held that no discretion remains where a contractual indemnity is enforced, but there are public policy considerations and an assessment is needed as to w...
...the issue as being whether it was the “appropriate forum to consider Ms BC’s complaint.”1 It further noted that a Committee “can decide to take no further action on a complaint where it considers there is an adequate remedy or right of appeal that would be reasonable for the complainant to exercise.”2 [28] The Committee then observed that the Office of the Privacy Commissioner “was established to provide information on privacy matters and to resolve privacy disputes, for...
...Authority’s determination on that issue. NIWA Vessel submits that if Ms Ashby had wished the Authority to award more than $20,000, she should have filed an amended statement of problem in the Authority. [42] NIWA Vessel relies on the Court of Appeal’s judgment in McCulloch and Partners v Smith.8 The appeal was from a judgment of the Employment Court in which the Employment Court had awarded a plaintiff $27,500 even though they had only sought $15,000 in their statement of...
...corrected on review, and the findings of unsatisfactory conduct should be dismissed. Nature and scope of review [69] The High Court has described a review by this Office in the following way:20 A review by the LCRO is neither a judicial review nor an appeal. Those seeking a review of a Committee determination are entitled to a review based on the LCRO’s own opinion rather than on deference to the view of the Committee. A review by the LCRO is informal, inquisitorial and robust. It...
Allison & Toko Golf Club Inc v Clutha District Council IN THE ENVIRONMENT COURT AT CHRISTCHURCH I TE KŌTI TAIAO O AOTEAROA KI ŌTAUTAHI Decision No. [2023] NZEnvC 162 IN THE MATTER of the Resource Management Act 1991 AND an appeal under s120 of the Act BETWEEN ALLISON & TOKO GOLF CLUB INCORPORATED (ENV-2023-CHC-6) Appellants AND PIONEER ENERGY LIMITED Applicant AND CLUTHA DISTRICT COUNCIL Respondent Environment Judge P A Steven – sitting alone under s279...
...the Court does is specialised – it involves the resolution of issues between parties to employment relationships within the industrial relations framework. All of this receives statutory recognition, including via ss 214(1) and 216, limiting appeals against a decision on the construction of either an individual employment agreement or a collective employment agreement, and (when deciding an appeal) requiring regard to be had to the special jurisdiction of the Court, the objects o...
SCAIFE V QLDC – TOPIC 38 – FINAL DECISION IN THE ENVIRONMENT COURT AT CHRISTCHURCH I TE KŌTI TAIAO O AOTEAROA KI ŌTAUTAHI Decision No. [2024] NZEnvC 111 IN THE MATTER of the Resource Management Act 1991 AND an appeal under clause 14 of the First Schedule of the Act BETWEEN JAN-MARC SERVAAS SCAIFE (ENV-2021-CHC-022) Appellant AND QUEENSTOWN LAKES DISTRICT COUNCIL Respondent Court: Environment Judge J J M Hassan Environment Commissioner J T Baines Hearing: On...
...contained a cross-reference to clause 7.2. In context, the cross-reference appeared to be an error. The Family Court Judge found that the reference to clause 7.2 “…was a clerical error and it should read 9.2”.5 [29] The applicant unsuccessfully appealed the Family Court’s main decision. He apparently also applied unsuccessfully to the High Court to recall the probate granted of Mr X’s will. [30] In total, the respondent’s firm charged the estate about $84,000 in legal...
BEFORE THE ENVIRONMENT COURT I MUA I TE KOOTI TAIAO 0 AOTEAROA IN THE MATTER AND BETWEEN AND Decision No. [2019] NZEnvC41 of the Resource Management Act 1991 of appeals under clause 14 of Schedule 1 to the Act OCEANA GOLD (NEW ZEALAND) LIMITED (ENV-2016-CHC-103) ROYAL FOREST AND BIRD PROTECTION SOCIETY OF NEW ZEALAND INCORPORATED (ENV-2016-CHC-102) ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENCE SOCIETY INCORPORATED (ENV-2016-CHC-122) Appellants OTAGO REGIONAL COUNCIL Respondent...