Search Results

1. Phillips v The Trustees of Mohaka A4 Trust - Mohaka A4 [2010] 2010 Maori Appellate Court MB 425 (2010 APPEAL 425) [pdf, 81 KB]

   ...apply; e) The Court should look at what is just in the circumstances and in doing so should have regard to the nature and course of the proceedings; the importance of the issues; the conduct of the parties; and whether the proceedings were informal or akin to civil litigation; f) If a party has acted unreasonably, for instance by pursuing a wholly unmeritorious and hopeless claim or defence, a more liberal award may well be made in the discretion of the Judge, but there is no in...

2. [2010] NZEmpC 156 Raukura Hauora o Tainui Trust v Nathan [pdf, 53 KB]

   ...that dealt with the misappropriation claim. There was no cross-challenge. The case raises the issue of whether an employer, in the event that misappropriation by an employee can be established, is able to recover the misappropriated funds in the form of damages pursuant to s 162 of the Employment Relations Act 2000 (the Act). The facts [4] The plaintiff is a Maori health provider providing health care services to all people within the boundaries of Tainui. In the South Aucklan...

3. Khan v Khetarpal [2016] NZIACDT 6 (22 January 2016) [pdf, 239 KB]

   ...wished to proceed regardless. [13.4] Ms Khetarpal then proceeded to file the EOI; she did so electronically. The electronic system prevents a non-qualifying application, so Ms Khetarpal had to file the electronic documents stating the applicant had “claimed” points for skilled employment; though she knew he did not have the points. She excuses this falsity on the basis it only says the applicant “claimed” points, not that he had the points. The electronic form also required a dec...

4. [2018] NZEmpC 20 Smith v Director General of the Ministry for Primary Industries [pdf, 282 KB]

   ...Mr Smith and Mr X telling them a formal investigation would be conducted. The allegation about Mr Smith to be investigated was that, without provocation, he repeatedly punched and struck Mr X while they were in the bar. Both men were informed that David Blake had been appointed to investigate the complaints and to report to MPI about them. A copy of his comprehensive terms of reference was provided. [15] Both men were informed that if there was a finding of serious misconduc...

5. [2019] NZEmpC 167 Bradley v Ngāti Apa Ki Te Rā Tō Charitable Trust [pdf, 424 KB]

   ...Authority dismissed Mr Bradley’s claim and he challenged that decision. Non-publication [6] The Authority made an order prohibiting publication of the name of the manager whose company’s invoices prompted the Trust’s inquiry, or any information that might identify her. That order was made because the manager did not participate in the investigation meeting and it was considered unjust, in those circumstances, for her identity to be published. She did not give evidence...

6. McCreath v Attorney-General (Costs) [2016] NZHRRT 4 [pdf, 55 KB]

   ...detailed the protracted history of Mr McCreath’s dealings with Legal Aid in the period 6 January 2014 to 23 December 2014. At a teleconference convened on 11 February 2015 Ms Scott confirmed Mr McCreath intended prosecuting the proceedings but requested no timetable directions be made until the grant of legal aid. It was anticipated a decision would be made within the next two weeks. The teleconference was adjourned. [6] By further memorandum dated 4 March 2015 Ms Scott gave notice...

7. [2016] NZEmpC 152 Pretorius v Marra Construction [pdf, 141 KB]

   ...1 Pretorius v Marra Construction (2004) Ltd [2016] NZEmpC 43. 2 Pretorius v Marra Construction (2004) Ltd [2016] NZEmpC 95, (2016) 10 NZELC 79-066. The Court also issued a judgment on 11 December 2015 dealing with a request by Marra Construction (2004) Ltd for an extension of time to file a challenge out of time; it was granted but no order for costs was made: Marra Construction (2004) Ltd v Pretorius [2015] NZEmpC 222. 3 Pretorius v Marra Constructio

8. Martin Trusts TRI-2017-100-006 Procedural Order 9 [pdf, 256 KB]

   ...The High Court directed the Tribunal to reconsider its “standing back” assessment, taking into account the claimants’ and the first and third respondents’ respective relevant interests. [64] In conducting the standing back exercise which forms a key part of the removal application jurisdiction, I am exercising a discretion. In so doing, I have considered the interests of both the claimants and the respondents. [65] I have reached the conclusion that the first and third...

9. LCRO 127/2017 EZ v UO [pdf, 265 KB]

   ...after she had terminated Mr UO’s retainer, the Court directed that Mr UO was to provide the documentation that he had retained from her file to her new lawyer. [63] She contends that Mr UO failed to comply with the Court’s direction, and with requests from her new lawyer to provide her with documentation requested. As a consequence she was unable to comply with directions for discovery issued by the Court. This failure resulted, she says, in the Court directing her to pay cost...

10. [2015] NZEmpC 189 Kirby v The NZ China Friendship Society [pdf, 173 KB]

    ...“oversight on our Society’s behalf of the establishment of cooperative Trainer of Trainers Programme at Shandon Bailie School and of the plan to extend cooperatives in four new counties of Zhangye”. The letter concluded by stating that the Society requested that support be given to Mr Kirby to assist in providing the valuable assistance which he had offered to provide. I find that this letter clearly indicated Mr Kirby was an experienced volunteer, and that the Society was p...