Search Results

1. Director of Proceedings v Brooks (Application for Final Non-Publication Orders) [2019] NZHRRT 33 [pdf, 1.6 MB]

   ...Arthur Brooks) is prohibited pending further order of the Chairperson or of the Tribunal. [26.2] There is to be no search of the Tribunal file without leave of the Chairperson or of the Tribunal. The plaintiff and defendant are to be notified of any request to search the file and given opportunity to be heard on that application. Liability admitted and damages claim settled [7] By second amended statement of claim dated 19 September 2017 the Director alleged Dr Brooks breached Right 4...

2. [2016] NZCA 21 CA616/2015 Nisha v LSG Sky Chefs NZ Limited [pdf, 403 KB]

   ...showing an increased rate of remuneration (rising from $15.96 per hour to $17.68 per hour) as a supervisor. No one else was notified of her new status either. If she was indeed a supervisor, those she would be supervising would surely have been informed. 6 (c) Mr Belk, a production sous chef at Pacific, gave evidence for LSG. His period of employment overlapped Ms Nisha’s transfer to LSG. He worked closely with supervisors and prepared the rosters. He said he was never tol...

3. [2020] NZEmpC 206 Awesome Art Ltd v Milne [pdf, 222 KB]

   ...prevented a challenge from being filed. It also offered no adequate reason for the delay from 6 July 2020 until the application was filed on 13 July 2020. Ms Jarrett attempted to explain part of this delay by her unfamiliarity with the Court’s forms or processes but that was not convincing. Awesome Art’s application showed it was able to articulate its concerns and there is no reason to assume it could not have expressed them in a timely statement of claim. [24] There is...

4. [2021] NZEmpC 166 Yakka Contracting Ltd v Naicker [pdf, 208 KB]

   ...matter was urgent. [3] Mr Naicker was an employee of Yakka Contracting Ltd (Yakka) until his resignation on 18 February 2021. Yakka intends to file proceedings against Mr Naicker in the Employment Relations Authority and withdraw corresponding claims and a freezing order application against him that currently form part of a High Court 1 Yakka Contracting Ltd v Naicker EMPC 343/2021, 30 September 2021 (Minute). proceeding. Before doing so, Yakka is applying to this Court...

5. BZ v Accident Compensation Corporation (Mental Injury) [2025] NZACC 065 (22 April 2025) [pdf, 196 KB]

   ...none of the signs and symptoms required to meet Criterion B. [29] On 7 December 2023, Dr Chris Dowling, Psychologist, advised that Dr Foliaki’s opinion should be preferred to Dr Coetsee’s opinion: 1. Dr Foliaki’s opinion was specifically requested as it was felt by Dr Mendiola and the client that a culturally informed perspective was important (in the review decision it was noted that the client “did not feel comfortable with ACC addressing his mental health issue in an ind...

6. Recording Industry Association of New Zealand v TCLE-A-T5877102 [2013] NZCOP 2 [pdf, 75 KB]

   ...correct (s.122N(3)). [24] The statutory presumptions are as follows: [a] That each incidence of file sharing identified in the notice constituted an infringement of the rights owner’s copyright in the work identified; and [b] That the information recorded in the infringement notice is correct; and [c] That the infringement notice was issued in accordance with the Act. [25] In this case, the Respondent has not submitted any evidence, or given any reasons, which might...

7. [2014] NZEmpC 196 Nelson v Katavich & Anor [pdf, 116 KB]

   ...the Bank of New Zealand which confirmed that confirmation of an inward telegraphic transfer would only be given when the overseas bank sent the customer’s address with the telegraphic transfer message; this would only be done if the customer requested such. The evidence suggested that Citibank had not sent any address for Ms Nelson, and therefore no advice in that regard was given to her. As it was put by the bank officer: “the funds would literally just have been received...

8. LCRO 144/2016 QT v UF (24 August 2018) [pdf, 245 KB]

   ...view, s 156(1)(h)(i) which empowers a Standards Committee, and this Office on review, to order a lawyer “to rectify, at [the lawyer’s] own expense, any error or omission” is the more appropriate authority. [99] Mr QT’s error was in requesting Ms UF to pay the invoice in circumstances where she was not responsible for payment. Decision [100] For the above reasons pursuant to s 211(1)(a) of the Act, the 16 June penalty determination of the Standards Committee is: (a)...

9. Mullane v Attorney-General (Request for Transcript) [2021] NZHRRT 31 [pdf, 143 KB]

   ...ATTORNEY-GENERAL DEFENDANT AT WELLINGTON BEFORE: Mr RPG Haines ONZM QC, Chairperson REPRESENTATION: Mr BG Mullane in person DATE OF HEARING: Heard on the papers DATE OF DECISION: 13 July 2021 DECISION OF CHAIRPERSON ON REQUEST BY PLAINTIFF FOR TRANSCRIPT OF HEARING1 Introduction [1] On 25, 26 and 27 September 2017 the Tribunal heard a claim by Mr Mullane against the Attorney-General under the Privacy Act 1993, IPP 8. At the relevant time Mr...

10. Waitangi Tribunal - issue 47 of Te Manutukutuku [pdf, 1.1 MB]

    T E R Ö P Ü WH A K A M A N A I T E T I R I T I O WA I T A N G I TE MA N U T U K U T U K U T he Tribunal has concluded its inquiry into the Wänanga Mäori Education Funding claim (Wai 718) with a one-day sitting in December, which heard the closing submissions of Te Whare Wänanga o Awanuiarangi, Te Wänanga o Raukawa, Te Wänanga o Aotearoa, and the Crown. The Tribunal granted the claim ur- gency on the basis that there appeared to be ‘grave risks that the wänanga programme...