Search Results

1. MacDonald v Accident Compensation Corporation (Personal Injury/Costs on Review) [2023] NZACC 175 [pdf, 339 KB]

   ...Injury, Causation s 26; Costs on Review s 148 Accident Compensation Act 2001] ___________________________________________________________________________ [1] In respect of appeal ACR 306/21, three issues are identified: (a) Cover in relation to a claimed injury, namely a below knee amputation (right leg). This is claimed to the be the consequence of an insect bite, but said to have been sustained after onset of significant symptoms of substantial vascular disease; (b) Provision o...

2. [2015] NZEmpC 35 Coy v Commissioner of Police [pdf, 592 KB]

   ...station [143] Constructive dismissal? [159] Application of s 122 Employment Relations Act 2000 [206] An observation [214] Remedies for unjustified disadvantages [216] Costs [217] Introduction [1] The issues in this proceeding between a former police officer and the Commissioner of Police as her employer, include:  whether the Commissioner disadvantaged Christine Coy unjustifiably in her employment; and  whether Ms Coy was dismissed constructively;  if so, whet...

3. Cotter v Cotter - Tutaekuri B13 [2019] Chief Judge's MB 951 (2019 CJ 951) [pdf, 471 KB]

   ...directions. On 8 August 2017, a notice of intention to appear was on behalf of Counsel Bidois for the respondents (transferees), filed a memorandum seeking a timetable for applicant’s evidence. The memorandum is summarised below: i. Counsel requested timetabling directions for filing of the applicant’s evidence; and ii. The applicant has not produced evidence to prove that the order is erroneous Submissions: i. Counsel claims that the applicant has no success without...

4. Clark v Trustees of Poukawa 9G and others trust (2011) 6 Takitimu MB 285 (6 TKT 285) [pdf, 136 KB]

   ...expenses and copies of legal and accounting advice. The trustees did not provide this information. [47] The general courts have long held that a trustee is not generally obliged to volunteer documents to beneficiaries. However, if a beneficiary requests it, the trustee, in most cases, must provide trust documents to the beneficiary and an accounting in respect of it. 14 [48] The leading New Zealand authority on what constitutes „trust documents‟ is Manukau City Council v...

5. MLC - Form 16 - Notice of proceedings [pdf, 75 KB]

   Page 1 For more information visit www.justice.govt.nz/courts/maori-land-court MLC 11/14 - 11 The Māori Land Court of New Zealand / Māori Appellate Court of New Zealand (Please select the name of the Māori Land Court District in which some or all of the lands or the subject matter of the application is located) Please select one District Taitokerau Waikato Maniapoto Waiariki Tairāwhiti Tākitimu Aotea Te Waipounamu TO: .................................................................

6. [2017] NZEmpC 68 Matsuoka v LSG Sky Chefs NZ Ltd [pdf, 272 KB]

   ...transfer; and (ii) to dismiss the plaintiff. (c) The defendant has made a number of inconsistent statements in relation to these key issues in the proceedings; (d) The defendant has claimed privilege in respect of documents which would, on the information available, render the statements made by 3 Matsuoka v LSG Sky Chefs New Zealand Ltd [2011] NZEmpC 44 [2011] ERNZ 56, (Part 6A judgment). the defendant’s agents a m...

7. Zhang & Cao v Chen [2018] NZIACDT 11 (5 April 2018) [pdf, 202 KB]

   ...in the invidious position of making large investments into companies where a person nominated by the adviser was the sole director. The complainant apparently did not meet the sole director, and was not provided with his contact details when requested. His address registered with the Companies Office was the same as the adviser’s address disclosed in a document before the Tribunal. Fees purportedly for the services of that director were allegedly paid to the director’s moth...

8. [2013] NZEmpC 26 Hegedus v Actronic Ltd [pdf, 102 KB]

   ...hardship to any other person, the effect on the rights and liabilities of any person, and the merits of the substantive case. The overriding consideration is the justice of the case. [5] Mr Hegedus says that he attempted to file a statement of claim on 9 November 2011 five days after the time for challenge had expired. It was rejected for being out of time. The earlier delay was then compounded by substantial further delays, with an application for leave not being filed until so...

9. BORA Ngāti Rangi Claims Settlement Bill [pdf, 115 KB]

   ...exclusion was consistent with arts 14 and 27 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which are comparable to ss 20 and 27(2) of the Bill of Rights Act.4 Whether s 27(3) at issue 11. Clause 24 of the Bill excludes damages or other forms of monetary compensation as a remedy for a failure of the Crown to comply with the taonga tūturu protocol. 12. This clause may be seen to raise the issue of consistency with s 27(3) of the Bill of Rights Act, namely the tight to...

10. SX v Q Ltd & TY [2024] NZDT 239 (9 February 2024) [pdf, 106 KB]

    ...management company but Q Ltd repeatedly failed/refused to do so. 14. The day before the first hearing on 5 October 2023, Q Ltd made a substantial written submission, which included multiple inspection reports that SX had never seen before, in a format inconsistent with previous reports. 15. SX files this claim seeking $25,524.32 for a partial refund of management fees and damages for multiple breaches of contract. 16. TY was joined as a second Respondent after the first hearing d...