Search Results

1. [2022] NZACC 103 - Renton v ACC (31 May 2022) [pdf, 259 KB]

   ...leave to appeal against a judgment of His Honour Judge McGuire, delivered on 5 November 2021.1 At issue in the appeal was whether the Corporation’s decision dated 15 June 2018, relating to Mr Renton, was correct. The Corporation rejected a claim for bilateral optic nerve atrophy secondary to elevated intracranial pressure, on the basis that the Corporation had already considered a previous claim Mr Renton had made for the same injury, which was declined. The Court dismissed the...

2. Ratima v Accident Compensation Corporation (Costs on appeal) [2023] NZACC 44 [pdf, 138 KB]

   ...of Discontinuance, which included that there be no order as to costs, for Mr Ratima’s consideration. [5] On 23 February 2023, instead of signing the draft Notice of Discontinuance, Mr Ratima filed a Notice of Discontinuance that included a request that the Corporation be ordered to pay an unspecified sum by way of Mr Ratima’s costs. Mr Ratima noted that otherwise he would need to take out a loan to pay Mr Meier. [6] On 15 March 2023, Mr Ratima and Mr Meier filed a memorandum...

3. [2013] NZEmpC 165 Matsuoka v LSG Sky Chefs NZ Ltd [pdf, 185 KB]

   ...questions of law proposed, which had not previously been before the Authority or the Court. These related primarily to issues arising under pt 6A of the Employment Relations Act (the Act). Urgency was granted for a hearing. [6] Mr Matsuoka was formerly an employee of PRI. That company traded under the name of Pacific Flight Catering (Pacific). PFC is a subsidiary of PRI and was incorporated simply for the purposes of protecting the Pacific Flight Catering brand name and does no...

4. Talanoa v Tangilanu [2015] NZIACDT 40 (15 April 2015) [pdf, 84 KB]

   ...DECISION Introduction [1] The Registrar of the Immigration Advisers Authority referred this complaint to the Tribunal. [2] The complaint is that Ms Tangilanu accepted instructions and received an initial fee to assist the complainants with a request for a visa. The allegations are that she: [2.1] Failed to comply with the requirements for commencing a professional relationship, as she had no written agreement, and did not attend to the various disclosure requirements. [2.2] She al...

5. Heads v Attorney-General [2015] NZHRRT 12 [pdf, 703 KB]

   ...between receiving those payments and other entitlements. [21.6] His financial loss from not receiving New Zealand superannuation over four years is approximately $75,000 gross ($364.50 x 208). He also believes he temporarily lost access to other forms of assistance available to superannuitants but not to persons in his situation ie persons who have reached NZSQA but who are not in receipt of superannuation. [22] As articulated by Dr McCrimmon in her closing submissions, the claim by...

6. [2012] NZEmpC 93 Marshment v Shaeppard Industries Ltd [pdf, 74 KB]

   ...for defendant Judgment: 14 June 2012 COSTS JUDGMENT OF CHIEF JUDGE GL COLGAN [1] In its substantive judgment delivered on 30 July 2010, 1 the Court concluded at [79] that Mr Marshment was entitled to his costs on the challenge. He claims a global award covering the Employment Relations Authority’s investigation and determination 2 (as a result of which costs were determined in that forum) and the challenge in this Court. [2] Included in the claim for costs is a con...

7. [2025] NZEmpC 115  Otira Stagecoach Hotel Limited v Wright  [pdf, 162 KB]

   ...Mr Wright claimed that he was dismissed by Otira Stagecoach following an incident in the hotel on 14 November 2018. He claimed that he was assaulted by Otira Stagecoach’s shareholder and director, Lester Rowntree. [2] The alleged assault formed the basis of Mr Wright’s claim of constructive dismissal in the Employment Relations Authority. The Authority agreed that Mr Wright was unjustifiably dismissed and ordered Otira Stagecoach to pay him compensation.1 1 Wright v...

8. [2021] NZEnvC 165 Poutama Kaitiaki Charitable Trust v Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Toanga [pdf, 554 KB]

   ...and Ngāti Maniapoto, or by the public authorities involved in the granting of the Authority and related resource consents. When First Gas applied for a resource consent from the New Plymouth District Council to remove the pipeline, it was informed that Ngāti Tama were tangata whenua and that Poutama were not tangata whenua in the area affected. First Gas sought and obtained written approval from Ngāti Tama in relation to both the Archaeological [1 O] [11] [1 2] [13]

9. [2021] NZEnvC 165 Poutama Kaitiaki Charitable Trust v Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Toanga [pdf, 554 KB]

   ...and Ngāti Maniapoto, or by the public authorities involved in the granting of the Authority and related resource consents. When First Gas applied for a resource consent from the New Plymouth District Council to remove the pipeline, it was informed that Ngāti Tama were tangata whenua and that Poutama were not tangata whenua in the area affected. First Gas sought and obtained written approval from Ngāti Tama in relation to both the Archaeological [1 O] [11] [1 2] [13]

10. [2017] NZEmpC 100 Lyttelton Port Company Ltd v Arthurs [pdf, 148 KB]

    ...Lyttelton Port’s application. [9] On 27 June 2017, Mr Arthurs gave notice to Lyttelton Port that he required disclosure by it of documents identified or described in six numbered paragraphs. The company objected because it considered the requests were too broad, vague, the documents requested did not exist, or what was asked for was not relevant. [10] Lyttelton Port’s objection was supported by an affidavit sworn by its industrial relations manager, Ms Sally Williams. Her...