Search Results

1. [2016] NZEmpC 93 Radius Residential Care Ltd v NZ Nurses Organisation [pdf, 72 KB]

   ...to be heard on Wednesday 10 August 2016, the plaintiff is seeking damages and penalties against the defendants on the basis of alleged unlawful strike action. [2] In an interlocutory judgment of Chief Judge Colgan dated 6 July 2016, issues of requests for disclosure of documents against the defendants were dealt with and resolved. 1 [3] The effect of the interlocutory judgment was that inter-parties document disclosure was not prohibited where penalties are included in the remedi...

2. Gengalo - Tuapou B8 (2004) 85 Ōpōtiki MB 110 (85 OPO 110 [pdf, 207 KB]

   ...any moves to establish ownership through the Maori Land Court; and (g) It is likely that the concrete foundation and septic tank cannot be removed without some damage to the land. In such a case there is a presumption that it was intended to form part of the land. I have found that the concrete foundation and septic tank are fixtures. Therefore there can be no compensation payable to the applicant. Minute Book: 85 OPO 113 This result may seem harsh but the reality is that anyo...

3. IS & JS v KC [2021] NZDT 1308 (9 April 2021) [pdf, 219 KB]

   ...redacted] has to offer. 2. The Cs own the farm upon which the baches are constructed, as the title to their land extends to the shoreline. 3. When the Cs bought the farm in the 1980s, the bach users became concerned that they might lose their informal rights that the previous landowner had respected. However, the Cs were happy to agree that the bach users had rights of access and occupation. They formalised this in a written “Licence to Occupy”. Under the Licence, the bach...

4. DD v H Ltd [2023] NZDT 536 (17 October 2023) [pdf, 214 KB]

   ...the respondent should be paid. Therefore, I find that the applicant should pay the respondent the amount of the invoice less $49.88, a total of $1,012.00. Referee: K. Armstrong Date: 17 October 2023 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 r...

5. ADD v ZWX [2013] NZDT 190 (15 May 2013) [pdf, 63 KB]

   ...along [road A]. ZWX was turning right from [road B] into [road A]. It was dark at the time of the collision. [2] The intersection is governed by a give way sign on [road B]. Leading into the intersection with [road B], [road A] briefly forms two lanes: one for vehicles turning right into [road B] and another for vehicles travelling straight ahead. Although the turning lane on [road A] is marked, it is not governed by a give way or stop sign. [3] WD and HU Insurance Ltd...

6. [2022] NZEmpC 191 McDermott v Employment Relations Authority [pdf, 172 KB]

   ...[8] Employsure sought costs of $12,786.50 calculated by using the steps in the scale amounting to 5.35 days. In addition, it sought costs for the time and effort taken to prepare the application for costs. [9] Mr Halse submitted that the costs claimed by Employsure should only be for four days under the scale; which would mean a potential costs exposure for Mr 2 Victoria University of Wellington v Alton-Lee [2001] ERNZ 305 (CA) at [48]. 3 “Employment Court of New Zealand Pra...

7. [2014] NZEmpC 88 Mega Wreckers Limited v Taafuli [pdf, 72 KB]

   ...challenge to the Authority’s determination. The statement of claim filed as a draft on 5 February 2014 will be regarded as having been validly filed today. [15] For the reasons touched upon in [11] above, I will be issuing a separate order requesting a good faith report from the Authority pursuant to s 181(1) of the Act. The respondent need not file a statement of defence until directed to do so by the Court. [16] Costs are reserved. A D Ford Judge Judgment s...

8. [2019] NZEmpC 117 Hatcher v Burgess Crowley Civil Ltd [pdf, 264 KB]

   ...was paid by way of holiday pay (including for public holidays, and alternative days off) when his employment with Burgess Crowley ceased was less than it ought to have been. [2] Burgess Crowley provided Mr Hatcher with his holiday and leave information for the period January 2010 to November 2016. Holiday and leave information for his employment prior to January 2010 was not retained by Burgess Crowley. In that context, the parties requested a preliminary hearing to det...

9. Gilbert v Accident Compensation Corporation (Claim for personal injury) [2024] NZACC 111 (3 July 2024) [pdf, 154 KB]

   ...description of an offence listed in Schedule 3. … (5) For the purposes of this section, it is irrelevant that— (a) no person can be, or has been, charged with or convicted of the offence; or (b) the alleged offender is incapable of forming criminal intent. [17] Section 25(1)(ba) of the Act provides: Accident means … the oral ingestion of any solid, liquid, gas, fungus, or foreign object on a specific occasion, which kind of occurrence does not include the ingestion o...

10. Wellington Standards Committee 1 v McCardle [2025] NZLCDT 14 (17 March 2025) [pdf, 89 KB]

    ...a muddled lapse, not an exercise of wickedness. [17] We (the Tribunal) erred in omitting to refer, in our liability decision, to Mr McCardle’s having made an admission in relation to a discrete part of the charge. The Standards Committee requested us to recall the decision. We did not do so but there was an additional round of written submissions and further work by the Tribunal. We thought the Standards Committee was justified in pulling us up on our oversight. It was req...