Search Results

1. TR v Accident Compensation Corporation (Leave to appeal to the High Court) [2023] NZACC 82 [pdf, 262 KB]

   ...Appeal to the High Court Section 162(1) Accident Compensation Act 2001] [1] This is an application for leave to appeal to the High Court against a judgment of His Honour Judge McGuire, delivered on 20 February 2023. [2] The applicant lodged a claim for tuberculosis (TB) as a work injury. The Corporation’s decision dated 5 June 2019 declined the claim on the basis the records did not suggest the applicant had suffered a personal injury, and even if a personal injury could be est...

2. [2025] NZEmpC 139 Epiphany Donuts Ltd & Ors v Satija (Judgment of Chief Judge Inglis, 8 July 2025) [pdf, 199 KB]

   ...leave to extend time to file a challenge under s 219 of the Employment Relations Act 2000 (the Act). Section 219 provides that: If anything which is required or authorised to be done by this Act is not done within the time allowed, or is done informally, the court … may in its discretion, on the application of any person interested, make an order extending the time within which the thing may be done, or validating the thing so informally done. [9] As will be apparent, s 219 confers...

3. Amendment to Grant Forms and High Cost Criminal Cases - Submissions and decisions [pdf, 715 KB]

   Legal Aid Services Amendment to Grant Forms & High Cost Criminal Cases Submissions and decisions March 2019 Foreword Thank you to everyone who engaged with the review on the amendment to grant forms and high cost criminal cases policy. Your contributions have helped us to determine the best way to ensure that our amendment to grant forms and the high cost criminal case policies are fit

4. [2016] NZEmpC 17 NZ Meat Workers & Related Trades Union Inc v AFFCO NZ Ltd [pdf, 126 KB]

   ...action – decision”. The full Court concluded that AFFCO had breached s 32(1)(d)(ii) and (iii) of the Act in engaging or attempting to engage individual employees being bargained for collectively by requiring those employees to accept AFFCO’s forms of individual employment agreements if they were to be re-engaged for the 2015/2016 season. [11] More particularly, the Court found that AFFCO acted in bad faith (in beach of ss 32(1) and 44 of the Act) in a number of ways. First...

5. Auckland Standards Committee 3 v Potter [2022] NZLCDT 27 (27 July 2022) [pdf, 110 KB]

   ...than in the course of his employment. This relates to his accepting engagement as the client’s employment representative when he was only permitted to undertake legal work as an employee. 9 [34] Although Mr Potter admitted the charge, we requested further submission from the Standards Committee to satisfy ourselves that Mr Potter had infringed s 9(1)(a) of the Act. Our request centred on whether the services for which Mr Potter contracted were regulated services. A non-law...

6. [2020] NZCAA 01 (7 July 2020) [pdf, 307 KB]

   ...that it was a costs order, when that was not the case. [2] The decision reserved costs, which are the subject of this decision. [3] The Respondent (Customs) said the Authority does not have jurisdiction to award costs on the basis the Appellant claimed costs. Customs sought to be heard further if I did not agree. In my view the Authority must set reasonable costs, having regard to the long- established principles that apply to cost awards in New Zealand. [4] The principles for th...

7. LW v QT Ltd [2023] NZDT 170 (7 June 2023) [pdf, 219 KB]

   ...with QT Ltd by parking where she did and what were the terms of that contract? 11. A contract may be defined as a legally binding agreement or a promise or set of promises between two or more parties that the law will enforce. For a contract to be formed there needs to be an agreement, an intention to create legal relations and consideration. There also needs to be certainty and clarity as to what is being agreed between the parties. 12. Photographs attached to an email sent by QT...

8. National Standards Committee v Orlov [2013] NZLCDT 45 [pdf, 390 KB]

   ...or attempts to keep separate the current charges faced by the practitioner. [3] Following service of the charges on him in May 2011, Mr Orlov had filed a Protest as to Jurisdiction and declined to file a “Response to Charge” in the proper form. This response is required to be filed within 10 working days of service pursuant to Regulation 7. Mr Orlov ultimately filed this document, after a final direction from the Tribunal, in February 2013. The response repeated the Protest t...

9. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights - government reply to issues 5th report [pdf, 458 KB]

   ...November 2009, the Government announced that it is likely that the Foreshore and Seabed Act would be repealed. No decisions have been made about what will replace it. Question 10. Measures to protect immigrants, asylum seekers and refugees from all forms of racial stereotyping and discrimination have been taken by the Department of Labour, Police and the Office of Ethnic Affairs. Department of Labour The Government has implemented the New Zealand Settlement Strategy since 2004...

10. Greaterex v Preston [pdf, 41 KB]

    ...credit the settlement sum received from the other respondents of $205,000.00. [4] Mr Tim Preston filed a preliminary response to the claim dated 10 March 2009 but chose not to attend the hearing. In his absence the hearing was essentially a formal proof process akin to that followed by the High Court in Body Corporate 191608 v Jontaeshyan Investments Limited & Ors (unreported) [19 February 2009] HC ,Auckland, CIV 2008-404-002358, Asher J. The claimants thus proceed on...