Search Results

1. ZG v DD Ltd & GT [2023] NZDT 119 (30 June 2023) [pdf, 118 KB]

   ...So, as DD Limited undertook to pay ZG the sum of $1000.00, I order it to do so. 13. I also order GT to pay ZG the remaining sum of $12,340.00. Referee: G.M. Taylor Date: 30 June 2023 CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 3 of 3 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 re...

2. FH v TI Ltd [2023] NZDT 263 (29 May 2023) [pdf, 172 KB]

   ...report on [news site] [regarding violence and criminal behaviour at the motel – details redacted]. Although BM questioned whether the report was accurate, the very fact that such an article had been published on a major news site was important information that would have affected the school’s decision. Parents would be concerned by such a report and the school, having a duty of care towards its students, would have needed to investigate further to be satisfied that the students would b...

3. OX v B Ltd [2023] NZHC 292 (28 July 2023) [pdf, 240 KB]

   ...the right earbud if OX paid half the cost, however I find that given there was a major failure with the product, that OX is entitled to a refund of the purchase price. Referee: Kaho Date: 28 July 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...

4. [2017] NZEmpC 56 Nel v ASB Bank Ltd [pdf, 179 KB]

   ...Court. If ASB calls evidence about such post-termination events from persons who are not senior managers, it is not unreasonable for Mr Nel to have access to other documents which will permit him to do the same. [50] I am satisfied that the request for disclosure meets the test of relevance, as defined, since it relates to the disputed issue of reinstatement. [51] I do not regard the prospect of searching for such documents as being unduly oppressive. Evidence has been placed b...

5. Tawera v Tawera – Waitangi A1A2 (2014) 39 Tairawhiti MB 45 (39 TRW 45) [pdf, 188 KB]

   ...back to the Māori Land Court with a direction to arrange reimbursement to Mrs Tarewa for her expenditure on the house or to grant her an order for exclusive occupation of the house for the term of her life or until 2015. Mrs Tarewa subsequently formed a partnership to farm neighbouring land with the applicant before she passed away. Applications [6] On 30 th August 2013, Pekama Tawera applied under s 19 of Te Ture Whenua Māori Act 1993 (“the Act”) for an injunction against...

6. [2016] NZEmpC 105 Caffe Coffee (NZ) Ltd v Farrimond [pdf, 124 KB]

   ...15 of sch 2 of the Act which bestows a broad discretion on the Authority to order one party to pay another such costs and expenses as the Authority thinks reasonable. The applicable principles are outlined in two full Court judgments: PBO Ltd (formerly Rush Security Ltd) v Da Cruz, 7 and Fagotti v Acme & Co Ltd. 8 [10] In summary, the Court has approved the notional daily rate approach to costs orders in the Authority, but particular circumstances may require the exercise...

7. [2021] NZEmpC 71 Bowen v Bank of New Zealand [pdf, 241 KB]

   ...that there are related proceedings that warrant removal, Ms Bowen points to three reasons why the Court ought, in its discretion, order the removal: (a) there is a strong public interest in the outcome of this matter; (b) Mr Leon Robinson, a former (and now reappointed) Member of the Authority is likely to be a critical witness and his credibility will need to be assessed; (c) costs and efficiencies. [8] BNZ opposes the application. It says there is no important question o...

8. EN & ENE v UM & UMU [2017] NZDT 997 (10 Febrary 2017) [pdf, 79 KB]

   ...able to simply step over it (rather than having caused damage to the fence) and that cows had got into the neighbouring property on several previous occasions. [2] On 15 August 2016, ENE issued a fencing notice to UM and UMU in the prescribed form, proposing repairs to the fence at a cost of $2000.00 plus GST and sharing the cost 50- 50. The notice outlined the timeframe of 21 days for a cross-notice as required by the Fencing Act 1978. [3] However, given the state of the fence an...

9. Hastie and Dredge TRI-2023-100-001 Procedural Order 5 [pdf, 251 KB]

   ...contract with the fifth respondent provide for the claimants to be responsible for obtaining a code compliance certificate. [37] Furthermore, Mr Jamieson in his affidavit says that after the sixth respondent completed its work, the claimants requested New Zealand Build to compile all relevant information to enable a final inspection and apply for a code compliance certificate. He has also provided an email from Mr Earl which relevantly states:10 Below I will note what we requi...

10. [2006] NZEmpC AC 57/06 Kumar v Icehouse (NZ) Ltd [pdf, 114 KB]

    ...the plaintiff about the complaint at the 4 June meeting. However, after some prompting by the defendant’s counsel at the hearing, she said she had told him that there had been a very serious complaint of sexual harassment but had declined his request to know who had laid the complaint and did not tell him what it was that he was alleged to have done. Ms Warin said that she did not consider it necessary to give any more details, as when she had asked the plaintiff, after his prot...