Search Results

1. [2008] NZEmpC AC 24/08 Panovski v Marine Trimmers and All Awnings 2004 Ltd [pdf, 78 KB]

   ...was discussed, Mr Steers did not expressly state that any improvement was required, nor was any warning or a caution given about Mr Panovski’s workmanship. [7] A number of other jobs were also discussed at the meeting. They were not jobs performed solely by Mr Panovski. Mr Steers says that he raised these as examples of the problems the defendant was experiencing and why it could not increase Mr Panovski’s pay. Mr Steers claims that they also discussed the time Mr Panovski...

2. [2008] NZEmpC AC 8/08 Taylor & Anor v von Tunzelman [pdf, 39 KB]

   ...$40,000, this to be paid by Mr Taylor as employer. [9] In the Authority’s “good faith” report to the Court it has reached the following conclusions: • Any criticism of the plaintiffs’ conduct could only relate to the Authority’s request for the provision of documents about commissions. • Not only did Mr Taylor fail to supply the material that he had agreed to but there was no explanation for that failure or request to have further time or be excused from the obliga...

3. [2022] NZEmpC 122 Reunited Employees Assoc Inc v Nelmac Ltd [pdf, 223 KB]

   ...communicative, and that it frustrated the bargaining process.14 [13] The Authority decided that REA’s position, about what was agreed in facilitation, was not arguable.15 [14] The Authority criticised REA’s behaviour as sometimes taking the form of distortion, blatantly denying things had occurred when they had or asserting that things had occurred when the evidence showed they had not. It made trenchant comments about occasions when the union’s impugned behaviour took...

4. XL v FJ [2021] NZDT 1618 (22 June 2021) [pdf, 127 KB]

   ...need to consider and evaluate all the evidence presented to me, including any oral evidence given at the hearing. I must weigh up this evidence to decide what is more likely than not. I would like to assure the parties that all the evidence and information presented has been considered, but this order refers only to the essential evidence and information that I consider material to the issues and it is not intended to be a full record of the hearings or of the evidence and information pres...

5. KH v LD [2019] NZDT 1496 (11 July 2019) [pdf, 173 KB]

   ...advertised on Facebook as a dog breeder. LD said that there would be a litter of [breed] puppies available in July 2018 for $2,300.00 each. They discussed her preferences for a puppy such as colour and eye shape. LD asked KH to fill out a Puppy Purchase Form if she wished to purchase a puppy, and to pay a $500.00 deposit to go on the waiting list for July. In a text, LD stated, “Deposit will be carried over to the next letter or refunded if you prefer not to wait.” 2. When KH receive...

6. O’Hagan v New Zealand Police (Discovery) [2017] NZHRRT 51 [pdf, 297 KB]

   ...the application. Mr O’Hagan has an acrimonious relationship with his ex-wife. A Family Court hearing in respect of a dispute between them concerning the care of their children had been set down for 29 June 2015. [5] On 2 May 2015 Mr O’Hagan requested access to his personal information from the Police. The information sought related to allegations made by Mr O’Hagan’s ex-wife against him. Mr O’Hagan intended to use the information in the Family Court hearing. [6] The inf...

7. LCRO 124-2014 SM v TK [pdf, 236 KB]

   ...wife. [3] Ms SM rendered an account for her services in July 2012. [4] Her account was not paid. 2 [5] Ms SM claimed a lien over Mr TK’s file on account of unpaid fees. Included on the file was Mr TK’s passport. [6] Mr TK made repeated requests to Ms SM to have his passport returned. Ms SM refused to provide the passport. The complaint and the Standards Committee decision [7] Mr TK lodged a complaint with the New Zealand Law Society Complaints Service (the Complaints S...

8. [2012] NZEmpC 27 Taylor v Milburn Lime Ltd [pdf, 76 KB]

   ...correct that the hearing was adjourned twice but the second adjournment was totally unavoidable. In respect of the first adjournment, I fixed costs at the time. [8] The defendant’s reluctance to settle is unsurprising given that the plaintiff’s claim had been entirely rejected by the Authority. [9] Other than to make those points, Mr Beck has provided no material to assist me in deciding what costs it was reasonable for the plaintiff to have incurred. In particular, I have n...

9. [2007] NZEmpC AC 15/07 Gates v Air New Zealand Ltd [pdf, 35 KB]

   ...seeks that the proceedings be stayed until such time as the order for costs, earlier made by the Employment Relations Authority in a determination dated 8 March 2005, has been complied with by the plaintiff. As a further alternative the defendant requests a stay on condition that the plaintiff pay the amount of the costs order into Court. [2] The grounds for the application are that there is reason to believe that the plaintiff will be unable to meet the costs of the defendant if...

10. [2014] NZEmpC 182 Fletcher v Sharp Studhope Lawyers [pdf, 75 KB]

    ...minute dated 13 January 2014 the Authority member required STL to provide the Authority with an unredacted version of the contested documentation in order to assist her in determining whether it was relevant to Mr Fletcher’s personal grievance claims. STL complied with the request. By minute dated 4 February 2014 the Authority declined to order full disclosure. Mr Fletcher filed a challenge. STL applied to strike out the challenge, primarily on the basis that it is precluded by...