Search Results

1. [2017] NZEnvC 090 Pierau v Auckland Council [pdf, 2.1 MB]

   ...consent application is made, on the one hand; and (b) Section 86F RMA (replacing s 19), which provides that a rule in a proposed plan must be treated as operative, and any previous rule as inoperative, if the time for making submissions or lodging appeals on the rule has expired and there have been no submissions/appeals in opposition or those submissions/appeals have been determined, 6 withdrawn or dismissed. [16] Counsel for the appellant drew our attention to some slightl...

2. ENVC Hearing 6Oct14 s274 evidence chief Janet Moore Appendix 3 Makgill [pdf, 303 KB]

   ...of the Treaty acknowledges that aboriginal title (‘the full exclusive and undisturbed possession of [Māori] Lands ...’) operates as a qualification on the Crown’s radical title.65. Accordingly, in Attorney-General v Ngati Apa 66 the Court of Appeal affirmed that the Crown’s radical title acquired on cession of sovereignty (imperium) was subject to the pre-existing rights of Māori. Sovereignty should not be conflated with absolute ownership (dominium) and the Crown’s radical ti...

3. [2020] NZEmpC 63 Southern Taxis Ltd v A Labour Inspector [pdf, 518 KB]

   ...necessary. 10 Clark v Northland Hunt Inc (2006) 4 NZELR 23 (EmpC) at [224]. 11 Three Foot Six Ltd v Bryson [2004] 2 ERNZ 526 (CA) per McGrath J dissenting, this approach being undisturbed on appeal to the Supreme Court. 12 Franix Construction Ltd v Tozer [2014] NZEmpC 159, [2014] ERNZ 347 at [44]. Analysis Common intention [73] As the Supreme Court explained in Bryson, the written and oral terms of the contra...

4. Flawn v Accident Compensation Corporation (Individual Rehabilitation Plan) [2024] NZACC 142 [pdf, 587 KB]

   IN THE DISTRICT COURT AT WELLINGTON I TE KŌTI-Ā-ROHE KI TE WHANGANUI-A-TARA [2024] NZACC 142 ACAR 125/23 UNDER THE ACCIDENT COMPENSATION ACT 2001 IN THE MATTER OF AN APPEAL UNDER SECTION 149 OF THE ACT BETWEEN AMBER FLAWN Appellant AND ACCIDENT COMPENSATION CORPORATION Respondent Hearing: 8 July 2024 Heard at: Invercargill/Waihōpai Appearances: P O’Sullivan for the appellant F Becroft for the respondent Judgment: 26 August 2...

5. [2017] NZEmpC 68 Matsuoka v LSG Sky Chefs NZ Ltd [pdf, 272 KB]

   ...decision-maker. Preliminary portions of that investigation can, 5 Irvines Freightlines Ltd v Cross [1993] 1 ERNZ 424. 6 Ioane v Waitakere City Council [2003] 1 ERNZ 104 (subsequently reversed on appeal in Waitakere City Council v Ioane [2004] 2 ERNZ 194 (CA), but only on the Employment Court’s approach to remedies). 7 At [24]-25]. and in many cases must, be delegated to others. But in the end, the decision- maker...

6. [2017] NZEmpC 70 Edminstin v Sanford Limited [pdf, 515 KB]

   ...universal that no person could be supposed to have entered into the agreement without looking to it as an element of the contract. 12 [45] More recently and as to evidence of custom, in Henry v London General Transport Services Ltd the UK Court of Appeal concluded: 13 … the burden of proof on custom and practice, … is upon the balance of probabilities. … Clear evidence of practice is, however, required to establish something as potentially nebulous as custom and practice,...

7. [2019] NZEnvC 110 Western Bay of Plenty District Council v Bay of Plenty Regional Council [pdf, 1.7 MB]

   BEFORE THE ENVIRONMENT COURT I MUA I TE KOOTI TAIAO O AOTEAROA Court: Hearing: Submissions: IN THE MATTER AND IN THE MATTER BETWEEN AND AND Decision No. [2019] NZEnvC l \ 0 of the Resource Management Act 1991 of an appeal pursuant to cl 14 of Schedule 1 to the Act WESTERN BAY OF PLENTY DISTRICT COUNCIL (ENV-2015-AKL-000127) Appellant BAY OF PLENTY REGIONAL COUNCIL Respondent PORT BLAKELY LIMITED, CARRUS CORPORATION LIMITED, TKC HOLDINGS LIMITED, NGA...

8. LCRO 28/2021 RW v BD and Law Firm A (3 May 2022) [pdf, 330 KB]

   ...advice from a separate law firm independent of Mr BD and [Law Firm A] regarding the division of relationship property, that the credibility and lack of enforceability of both agreements was identified”.23 19 At [31]. 20 Mr RW, Notice of Appeal to LCRO (8 March 2021) at [1.1]. 21 At [2.2]. 22 At [2.3]. 23 At [2.5]. 10 No documentary evidence [42] Mr RW draws attention to the fact that there was “never any formal recordings in the form of a draft letter or no...

9. [2022] NZEmpC 192 E Tū Inc v Rasier Operations BV [pdf, 483 KB]

   ...independent contractors, it is likely that the gateway will become increasingly narrowed over time. If the definition, properly interpreted, has a broader purpose, the gateway will likely admit a more diverse range of workers. [7] As the Court of Appeal has stated in the context of interpreting relationship property legislation:18 Although the Act operates upon "property" as a subject-matter the law it lays down is not a part of the law of property in any traditional sense. Ins...

10. [2023] NZEmpC 162 Birthing Centre Ltd v Matsas [pdf, 445 KB]

    ...of s 4(4)(d) of the Act does not include a consultant’s proposal or recommendation for an employer to consider but, if adopted or pursued by the employing Council, is a proposal for the purposes of that section. [63] The case proceeded on appeal before a full Court of the Court of Appeal. The appeal was allowed, but the status of the consultant’s report was not in issue.63 [64] Speaking generally as regards the obligation of good faith, the Court of Appeal said this regardin...