Search Results

1. [2024] NZEmpC 231Aurecon New Zealand Limited v Dowlut [pdf, 251 KB]

   ...days whilst further inquiries were made about her health. [53] Then Ms Dowlut resumed work, with the employer being satisfied that she could work and undertake disciplinary processes with appropriate support. At the same time, however, Aurecon requested any information Ms Dowlut wanted considered as part of the disciplinary process. Three weeks later, it attempted to restart the disciplinary process by inviting Ms Dowlut to a meeting. She declined to be involved thereafter, but...

2. J v ACC [2010] NZACA 2 [pdf, 39 KB]

   ...1992, immediately after filing her claim in September 1992 for compensation for mental injuries suffered from multiple instances of sexual abuse. Ms Hubble argues there was no analysis of the effects of these instances of abuse on the appellant as forming a “continuum” and Ms Hubble submitted that the Authority has no evidential basis on which to apply JM on that point. [7] Additionally Ms Hubble argued that the application of JM is also inappropriate given that the claim in tha...

3. SN v VO Ltd [2021] NZDT 1679 (29 October 2021) [pdf, 231 KB]

   ...to reply to CAA’s questions. However, the CAA did not wish to hear from her. They wished to hear directly from KM. That could not have been anticipated by SN. 22. SN has recorded her hours spent on preparing for this T180 call and given the information required to be reviewed and preparation needed for such a call, I accept her recorded hours as an accurate reflection of her work. 23. SN carried out 20 hours of work for VO Ltd between 1 June 2021 and 12 July 2021. Is VO Lt...

4. Bristol v Ngāti Rangi Trust - Rangiwaea-Tāpiri [2017] Chief Judge's MB 269 (2017 CJ 269) [pdf, 435 KB]

   ...Part No 6C and Rangipō Waiu 1B blocks.’ The Chief Surveyor had sought the application because the Crown 2017 Chief Judge’s MB 273 was seeking to use the land for a National Park. On 1 June 1960 the application was dismissed on the request of the Chief Surveyor. 3 [8] Less than a week later, on 7 June 1960, the application was reinstated. 4 At the 17 August 1960 hearing, evidence was given on behalf of Ngāti Waewae that they owned all the surrounding land and laid cl...

5. Recording Industry Association of New Zealand v Telecom NZ 4451 [2013] NZCOP 15 [pdf, 146 KB]

   ...Love” was not on their computer (or on any other computer which may have been used at the Respondents’ IP address), and that a friend had looked at their computer and confirmed that uTorrent had been deleted. No Hearing [21] Neither party has requested a hearing, and the Tribunal sees no need to convene one. Accordingly, the application is being determined on the papers pursuant to s.122L of the Act. Discussion and Findings In what Circumstances is the Applicant entitled t...

6. Balich v Standing [2012] NZIACDT 42 (24 August 2012) [pdf, 115 KB]

   ...the agreed services, Mr Balich says Mr Standing failed to refund the fees he had been paid. Mr Balich was put to the expense of making a new application after terminating Mr Standing’s engagement. [3] Mr Balich provided evidence to support his claim, and despite the Tribunal requesting that Mr Standing provide his records and deal with the complaint, Mr Standing has not responded. [4] The Tribunal has found the material before it supports the complaint, and it has been upheld. The...

7. [2015] NZEmpC 234 2015 AFT v BCM [pdf, 294 KB]

   ...which were very arguably not made out in this case. I will come back to these. [50] This was not litigation brought repeatedly by the applicant against the respondent or others associated with it, whether plainly or dressed up in alternative forms or forums. It was a serious claim that was brought by the applicant, that he had been dismissed constructively and unjustifiably by his employer from professional employment. The applicant’s claims were that the employer respondent...

8. [2014] NZEmpC 169 Goulden v Capital and Coast District Health Board [pdf, 97 KB]

   ...out their respective views of the matter. [3] The facts are: a) On 7 July 2014, the plaintiff’s lawyers contacted the defendant’s lawyers asking whether they were authorised to accept service of the plaintiff’s statement of claim. By email of 7 July 2014, counsel for the defendant confirmed that she was so authorised. b) On the same day a letter was sent by signature-required courier from the plaintiff to the defendant, enclosing by way of service the statemen...

9. TEF v Grimshaw [2025] NZHRRT 33 [pdf, 398 KB]

   ...[6] On 1 February 2019 during a charter run the plaintiff and Mr Grimshaw had a conversation in which the plaintiff says he offered to get her the BB run in return for sex. The plaintiff says she was upset and unsure how to respond to his request for sex but decided to go along with it as she could not afford to lose her job or work hours. Mr Grimshaw denies offering to get the plaintiff the BB run in exchange for sex in that conversation, he says rather they discussed how a s...

10. L v EQC [2022] CEIT-2019-0038 / 0044 [pdf, 221 KB]

    ...entirety. [13] The Declination Letters advised Ms L that should she not agree with the decision, that she could supply further information in support of her claims, and that EQC would reconsider its decision on receipt of such information. EQC requested that the amounts already paid out to Ms L for the emergency work claimed, be repaid to it. [14] The matter came to a head again two years later in 2015. In a letter to EQC dated 10 June 2015 Ms L offered to repay the amounts sough...