14835 items matching your search terms
IN THE DISTRICT COURT AT WELLINGTON I TE KŌTI-Ā-ROHE KI TE WHANGANUI-A-TARA [2021] NZACC 133 ACR 195/18 UNDER THE ACCIDENT COMPENSATION ACT 2001 IN THE MATTER OF AN APPEAL UNDER SECTION 149 OF THE ACT BETWEEN JEROME LARASON Appellant AND ACCIDENT COMPENSATION CORPORATION Respondent Hearing: 21 July 2021 Heard at: Christchurch/Otautahi Appearances: Ms K Coulston for the appellant Mr C Light for the respondent...
IN THE DISTRICT COURT AT WELLINGTON I TE KŌTI-Ā-ROHE KI TE WHANGANUI-A-TARA [2021] NZACC 172 ACR 9/19 UNDER THE ACCIDENT COMPENSATION ACT 2001 IN THE MATTER OF AN APPEAL UNDER SECTION 149 OF THE ACT BETWEEN SOHEL SHAFTYAT Appellant AND ACCIDENT COMPENSATION CORPORATION Respondent Hearing: 23 August 2021 Heard at: Via telephone Appearances: Mr M Darke for the appellant Ms B Johns for the respondent Judgmen...
...fined her $2,000 ($1,000 for each breach) and ordered her to pay costs of $1,395 to the purchasers. [6] The liability decision of the Committee was upheld by the Tribunal (differently constituted from the current panel) on [date]. It left open an appeal by the purchasers and a cross-appeal by the defendant against the Committee’s penalty orders. This was because the Tribunal referred back to the Committee consideration of whether misconduct charges should have been brought agains...
IN THE DISTRICT COURT AT WELLINGTON I TE KŌTI-Ā-ROHE KI TE WHANGANUI-A-TARA [2024] NZACC 101 ACAR 094/23 UNDER THE ACCIDENT COMPENSATION ACT 2001 IN THE MATTER OF AN APPEAL UNDER SECTION 149 OF THE ACT BETWEEN QUINTON PARISH Appellant AND ACCIDENT COMPENSATION CORPORATION Respondent Hearing: 27 March 2024 Heard at: Christchurch/Ōtautahi Appearances: The appellant in person supported by his wife Mr D Russ for the respondent S...
IN THE DISTRICT COURT AT WELLINGTON I TE KŌTI-Ā-ROHE KI TE WHANGANUI-A-TARA [2024] NZACC 106 ACAR 251/23 UNDER THE ACCIDENT COMPENSATION ACT 2001 IN THE MATTER OF AN APPEAL UNDER SECTION 149 OF THE ACT BETWEEN DAVID JONES Appellant AND ACCIDENT COMPENSATION CORPORATION Respondent Hearing: 17 June 2024 Held at: Wellington/Te Whanganui-a-Tara by AVL Appearances: B Hinchcliff for the Appellant F Becroft for the Accident Co...
...available on call within ten minutes if required. Interim injunction principles [25] The principles to apply to this application are not disputed. They were authoritatively stated in NZ Tax Refunds Ltd v Brooks Homes Ltd where the Court of Appeal said:5 The approach to an application for an interim injunction is well established. The applicant must first establish that there is a serious question to be tried or, put another way, that the claim is not vexatious or frivolous....
...Minister’s Chief Advisor) p 5. (www.pmsca.org.nz) 8 Section 5(2)(c) RMA. 9 Section 31(1). 10 There is a difference in the wording of the functions about natural hazards of territorial authorities and regional councils. However the Court of Appeal said early on that the difference is immaterial: Canterbury Regional Council v Banks Peninsula District Council [1995] 3 NZLR 189 at 195. Judge Jackson Predictions in an Uncertain World – assessing effects under the Resource M...
Durham Property Investments Limited v Napier City Council IN THE ENVIRONMENT COURT AT AUCKLAND I TE KŌTI TAIAO O AOTEAROA KI TĀMAKI MAKAURAU Decision [2022] NZEnvC 077 IN THE MATTER OF an appeal under section 120 the Resource Management Act 1991 (the Act) BETWEEN DURHAM PROPERTY INVESTMENTS LIMITED (ENV-2021-AKL-102) Appellant AND NAPIER CITY COUNCIL Respondent Court: Environment Judge MJL Dickey, sitting alone pursuant to s 279 of the Act Date of Ord...
...The hearing, therefore, consisted solely of submissions by counsel. Principles [5] The principles to be applied in construing and applying employment agreements in cases such as this were discussed in depth by this Court and by the Court of Appeal in New Zealand Tramways and Public Transport Employees Union Inc v Transportation Auckland Corporation Ltd 2 and NZ Meat Workers and Related Trades Union Inc v Silver Fern Farms Ltd (formerly PPCS Ltd). 3 In deciding this case, I am...
...counsel for plaintiff R Towner and S Maxfield, counsel for defendant Judgment: 19 October 2015 JUDGMENT OF CHIEF JUDGE G L COLGAN [1] Despite other aspects of the plaintiff’s proceeding now having been dismissed by the Court of Appeal as extra-jurisdictional, 1 there remains for decision the plaintiff’s challenge to the costs determination of the Employment Relations Authority. 2 The parties have agreed to deal with that challenge on memoranda filed (as t...