Search Results

1. [2024] NZEmpC 50 Atlas Concrete Limited v Hadfield [pdf, 200 KB]

   ...determination of the Employment Relations Authority AND IN THE MATTER OF an application for directions as to the nature and scope of the hearing AND IN THE MATTER OF an application for further and better particulars of the statement of claim BETWEEN ATLAS CONCRETE LIMITED Plaintiff AND SHANE HADFIELD Defendant Hearing: 14 February 2024 (Heard at Wellington via AVL) Appearances: J D Turner and H Wijewardhana, counsel for plaintiff P...

2. [2021] NZEmpC 230 Allison v Ceres New Zealand LLC [pdf, 175 KB]

   ...Authority, discontinuing proceedings in the Authority seeking compliance, and not seeking costs associated with steps taken in this proceeding to that point in time. There was no response to that offer. [6] Mr Allison does not oppose an order but has requested it be for a lesser amount than Ceres claimed. Ms Oberndorfer, Mr Allison’s advocate, accepted that the calculation provided by Ceres complied with the Court’s Guideline Scale. A deduction was sought, however, because...

3. CG v SG [2019] NZDT 1488 (2 April 2019) [pdf, 179 KB]

   ...some of the background is missing also. SG argued that the wave is the main object of the scene, and that this is reflected in the title “wave 02”. While I accept that the wave is the central focus of the image, the rest of the picture still forms part of the description or sample. The picture received did not correspond with that, and while I accept SG’s explanation that it would be technologically impossible to match it exactly, nevertheless that does not remove or override the o...

4. RS v GT Limited [2019] NZDT 1398 (22 May 2019) [pdf, 230 KB]

   ...employer, GT Limited is vicariously liable for the negligent actions of their employee and must pay the reasonable losses suffered by RS as a result of the negligent actions. What are RS’s reasonable losses? 10. RS has provided evidence in the form of a detailed panelbeater estimate to show that repairing the several areas of scratching along the roof of his car will cost $1948.10. These costs are accepted as reasonable in the absence of any other cost evidence and I note that the...

5. DE v UC Ltd [2024] NZDT 203 (17 January 2024) [pdf, 96 KB]

   ...Section 42 of the Disputes Tribunal Act provides that where the case of any party is not presented to the Tribunal after a reasonable opportunity has been given to that party to do so, the matter may be resolved by the Tribunal on such evidence or information as is before it. 2. In July 2022, DE visited UC Ltd and was seen by KH, the director of UC Ltd. DE says he was informed at the consultation that he needed five dental implants and two extractions. A plan was made to carry ou...

6. LCRO 118/2018 VT v MQ (18 March 2020) [pdf, 157 KB]

   ...2015. Ms MQ had been paid $11,291.48, and had applied those funds to her invoices, leaving an unpaid balance of $10,102.93. [18] Ms MQ supplied a copy of the advice, and advice from counsel, Mr BJ, to enable Mr VT and Mr RH to brief Mr PY. Ms MQ requested payment of her outstanding fees before the file was uplifted. Further attempts to encourage Yelp to pay the outstanding balance came to naught, and in September 2016 Ms MQ’s firm commenced debt recovery proceedings in the Dist...

7. Heta v Ministry of Social Development [2012] NZHRRT 2 [pdf, 46 KB]

   ...[1.2] The giving of timetable directions for the filing of the evidence to be called at the hearing by the parties and for the allocation of a date of hearing. [2] In accordance with Direction [24.4] the Secretary sent to the Privacy Commissioner the request of the Tribunal that she advise whether any of the investigations conducted by her were in respect of any or all of Ms Heta’s children. [3] By letter dated 16 December 2011 the Assistant Commissioner (Legal and Policy) advised tha...

8. KH v XS [2019] NZDT 1393 (20 August 2019) [pdf, 208 KB]

   ...degree to which the door was open. 11. As there is a competing recollection of when and how the door was open at the time of the impact, I am unable to make a finding about whether XS was exiting his car or turning back in to the car. If it was the former, then the starting point was that XS was liable, but for any contribution for driving too close. If it was the latter, then it is possible that KH would be liable, because the incident might only have occurred by her failing to see a...

9. DD TU v BM [2021] NZDT 1607 (10 August 2021) [pdf, 198 KB]

   ...been serviced on occasions during the period that BM had owned it. The applicants said that there were some relatively minor matters which needed attention. However, the mechanic who dealt with them drew their attention to a leaking head gasket. He informed them that it could blow at any time, and that they should not use the car for towing. He warned them that they should check the oil and water every time that they used the car. He told the applicants that BM had been aware of this issue...

10. EO v BD Ltd [2021] NZDT 1599 (30 July 2021) [pdf, 198 KB]

    ...expected based on the sample provided, I find that her claimed amount of a 50% reduction in value of $750.00 is a reasonable compensation for the failure. Referee: J Perfect Date: 30 July 2021 Page 4 of 4 Information for Parties Rehearings You can apply for a rehearing if you believe that something prevented the proper decision from being made: for example, the relevant information was not available at the time. If you wish to apply for a reh...