Search Results

1. [2015] NZEmpC 165 NZ Meat Workers & Related Trades Union Inc v AFFCO NZ Ltd [pdf, 86 KB]

   ...commencing on 27 October 2015. I just emphasise that I have very much paraphrased the nature of the two sets of proceedings. [2] Somewhat belatedly in EMPC 152/2015 the plaintiffs have sought further amendments to their second amended statement of claim. This in part is opposed by the defendant AFFCO. One of the amendments sought and which is not opposed, is of an inconsequential nature. It is something which can be attended to at the hearing without the need to formally file...

2. Tai Rakena v Corrections (Strike-Out Application) [2018] NZHRRT 19 [pdf, 84 KB]

   ...DECISION: 17 May 2018 DECISION OF TRIBUNAL1 [1] By application dated 4 May 2018 the Chief Executive, Department of Corrections has applied to have these proceedings struck out on the grounds: [1.1] The Tribunal lacks jurisdiction to hear the claim as no investigation has been conducted in terms of the Privacy Act 1993 (PA), s 82(1)(a). It is submitted the policy reasons in Gray v Ministry for Children (Strike-Out Application) [2018] NZHRRT 13 apply. [1.2] Mr Tai Rakena has f...

3. Kemp v Matenga - Ngatarawa and Ohiti Waitio Land Trust (2016) 55 Takitimu MB 142 (55 TKT 142) [pdf, 187 KB]

   ...the trust employs an accountant at significant cost who participates in decisions even though he is not a trustee. [13] In addition, she argued that the grants for 2016 were the sole responsibility of the accountant who changed the application forms outside of a trust meeting and dispersed the forms to the applicants and received them at his home. Because she thought the accountant was unwell she took the applications with her to review them. Sandra Matenga claims that she then dis...

4. Hill v Whimp [pdf, 158 KB]

   ...the question of quantum would be put aside at that stage and that I was to give my determination only on the question of liability, with the parties then deciding what steps might follow that decision. Accordingly Mr Taylor’s evidence has not formed part of this determination. [8] It should also be recorded that at the hearing I obtained the consent of the parties to a reasonable extension to the timing of the completion of this determination, pursuant to s 40(1)(b) of the Act....

5. [2017] NZEmpC 47 Singh v Trustees of the Wellington Rudolf Steiner Kindergarten Trust [pdf, 104 KB]

   ...Group Ltd [2011] NZEmpC 151. explicitly that it should be effective immediately upon being signed by both parties. … [21] Three points can be made about the Penney decision to differentiate it from Abernerthy. First, a contract was formed independently of the involvement of the mediator. Secondly, the mediator’s signature would only bring s 149(3) to bear on the parties. Thirdly, the settlement agreement did not contain a term stating that it be effective only if...

6. [2011] NZEmpC 99 Broughton v Microsoft NZ Ltd [pdf, 77 KB]

   ...defendant Judgment: 8 August 2011, recalled and re-issued 10 August 2011 INTERLOCUTORY JUDGMENT OF CHIEF JUDGE GL COLGAN [1] This interlocutory judgment determines the defendant’s objection to disclosure and inspection of certain documents as requested by the plaintiff, and associated issues. [2] The procedure that has led to this hearing, and the need to depart significantly from the statutory scheme for disclosure and inspection of documents under the Employment Cour...

7. [2013] NZEmpC 102 Tan v Morningstar Institute of Education Ltd t/a Morningstar Preschool [pdf, 77 KB]

   ...filed her costs memorandum. The defendant did not. On the morning of 4 June 2013, Mr Pa’u for the defendant apologised for the failure and asked for an extension of time until 6 June 2013. No reason was given for the failure or the need to request an extension. It would have been helpful if the request for extension had been made on 31 May. In the event, because I would have retired 1 [2013] NZEmpC 82. by 6 June, I d...

8. LCRO 117/2017 LA v KB (11 December 2019) [pdf, 157 KB]

   ...lodged a complaint with the Lawyers Complaints Service on 17 November 2016. He said he did so in his capacity as a trustee of the NB Trust, whose interests he said were “creditors” in the liquidator’s claim against the Council. [14] He requested an investigation into Mr BAK’s “fee and its structure” which he said was unfair to him, and to the public at large. He sought a refund of the fees charged by Mr BAK, and disciplinary sanction by way of a fine against Mr BAK....

9. LCRO 130/2017 HS v NC and EH (18 September 2019) [pdf, 260 KB]

   ...September 2015. [5] Mr HS met with the practitioners the following day. They provided to him that day by email a letter of engagement accompanied by information on the principal aspects of client care and service, and terms of engagement. They requested “$1,000 plus GST” in advance of their fees which he paid.1 [6] Mr HS met with the practitioners again a week later, on 24 September 2015. At that meeting he raised with the practitioners his dispute with [hardware store], ab...

10. CAC 401 v Black & Wong [2016] NZREADT 42 [pdf, 149 KB]

    ...dispute between the two companies. [5] The issues in this case arise out of what happened next. Almost a year after the sale of the property and in July 2013, Mr Smith was in Century 21’s office in Pakuranga when Mr Black approached him and made a request that he pay Mr Black and Mr Wong the sum of $2,000 each. Mr Black said that this was their share of the commission on the property. Mr Smith declined to make this payment. [6] Mr Smith’s evidence is that in August 2013 Mr Blac...