Search Results

1. [2022] NZEmpC 175 Invacare New Zealand Ltd v Pyne [pdf, 193 KB]

   ...compensation for lost wages and $8,500 compensation under s 123(1)(c)(i) of the Employment Relations Act 2000 (the compensation figure having been reduced by 15 per cent for contribution). [2] Mr Pyne filed a non-de novo challenge in the Court, claiming that the Authority erred in fact and law in its approach to the calculation of non-pecuniary loss under s 123(1)(c)(i). The challenge was filed on 1 July 2022, which was 24 days after the date of the Authority’s determination. Th...

2. [2018] NZEnvC 207 Sustainable Otakiri Incorporated v Bay of Plenty Regional Council [pdf, 825 KB]

   ...\\<:' ',: COU\\\ \:'>' ",-,,,,,,. "." ,"" 5 by the group. [14] The case for Sustainable Otakiri is that twelve people living in proximity to Creswell's site on Hallett and Johnson Roads formed an unincorporated body that called itself "Save our Otakiri Water and Environment Group". Eleven of them were identified by the District Council as an affected person and notified; ten of them made submissions on the appl...

3. Elhassan v Webby [2022] NZHRRT 27 [pdf, 313 KB]

   ...expertise to enforce the Disputes Tribunal order, nor did the Office of Human Rights Proceedings have the ability to act for him to enforce that order. [76] The Tribunal refuses to make the order sought by Mr Elhassan in respect of his $400 bond. The request for such an order is ill-conceived for the following reasons. The Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to make an order that relates to an enforcement of an order made by another tribunal or court. Further, the matter is both moo...

4. [2011] NZEmpC 127 Bishop v Bennett [pdf, 162 KB]

   ...which caused great distress to the passengers and delayed the ship’s return to port. Ms Bennet arrived back in Timaru late on Saturday 2 August 2008. [8] Ms Bennet went back to work on Monday 4 August 2008. In her absence, Mr Bishop had again formed the view that Ms Bennet had been dishonest in the course of her employment. One of his concerns was that Ms Bennet had purchased unnecessary stationery and items for herself on the business account at Warehouse Stationery. He had g...

5. [2006] NZEmpC AC 68/06 Colosimo & Anor v Parker [pdf, 78 KB]

   ...specifically mentioned, it can be inferred that the Authority found no contributory conduct on Mr Parker’s part. [3] In an unusual twist to the decision, Mr Colosimo was found as employer to have failed to keep time and wage records in the required format and failed to supply them when requested. Pursuant to ss130(4) and 135(2)(a) of the Employment Relations Act 2000, Mr Colosimo was ordered to pay a penalty of $4,000 for such breaches. Of this sum $1,000 was to be paid to Mr...

6. [2018] NZEmpC 9 Lyttelton Port Co Ltd v Arthurs [pdf, 297 KB]

   ...the employee would have to undertake a rehabilitation programme. [14] Mr Arthurs was selected for testing. Although the testing was said to be random, Mr Arthurs believed that he was being targeted. He also was not prepared to sign the consent form that the agency that carried out the testing required, meaning that it did not carry out the test. Mr Arthurs’ refusal to sign the consent form for the testing was treated by LPC as a refusal to undertake the random test. This meant...

7. Canterbury Westland Standards Committee v Withers [2013] NZLCDT 39 [pdf, 229 KB]

   ...receive payment from Mr Withers following settlement of that sale, as Mr Withers had undertaken it would. [48] A year later, on 18 October 2011, the Council contacted Mr Withers, noting that it had become aware that the lot had been sold. It requested payment of the development contribution amount which had been due from settlement proceeds in accordance with his undertaking. [49] Mr Withers responded by asking that the arrangements constituted by the undertaking be varied...

8. Van Workum & Ors as Trustees of the Van Workum Family Trust v Auckland City Council [2010] NZWHT Auckland 20 [pdf, 210 KB]

   ...long after moving in, Ms Van Workum realised that the dwelling was leaky and lodged a claim with the Department of Building and Housing on 6 January 2006 whereby the WHRS Assessor concluded in his report that the claim is eligible. Accordingly, claims and cross-claims were made against the ten respondents in this claim. Mediation [4] A mediation hearing was held on 15 December 2009 at the office of the Tribunal. All parties to this claim attended the mediation except t...

9. Gemmell v Hemana - Mohaka A4 (2017) 61 Tākitimu MB 239 (61 TKT 239) [pdf, 257 KB]

   ...Copies to: Leo Watson, 342 Gloucester Street, Taradale, Napier 4112 leo@leowatson.co.nz mailto:leo@leowatson.co.nz 61 Tākitimu MB 240 Introduction [1] On 18 June 2017, the Court received correspondence from Sharon Gemmell requesting that the Court investigate matters concerning the repayment of monies it is claimed are owed by Mohaka A4 trust to Samuel Gemmell. I subsequently directed Mr Hemana, sole responsible trustee, to file a report on the matters relating...

10. [2015] NZEmpC 63 Premier Events Group Ltd v Beattie Ors [pdf, 249 KB]

    ...jurisdiction, of this delay and the reasons for it. [4] Before turning to PEGL’s claim for an order staying the balance of the proceedings in this Court (being an assessment of damages that may be due by Mr Beattie to PEGL), it is important to record formally what the Court has and has not done to date. In respect of those causes of action by PEGL against Mr Beattie that remain alive, the Court has not entered judgment for PEGL. Rather, on questions of liability alone, it has...