Search Results

1. MK v PB LCRO 338/2012 (11 July 2014) [pdf, 175 KB]

   ...there had been no invoices rendered during the course of the retainer; it was understandable that this conduct would have led Mr PB to infer that the fees would be paid out of the proceeds of successful litigation, particularly as no security was requested over his property. Having reviewed the submissions, the Committee considered that the specific wording in the letter of 24 March 2011 could reasonably be seen to have overridden the general policy and usual billing procedure of DE i...

2. Steele v MSC 2018 Ltd (Application for Removal of Stay) [2019] NZHRRT 26 [pdf, 216 KB]

   ...Grounds for lifting stay [6] Subsequent to the making of the referral and stay orders Mr Steele has by memorandum dated 16 May 2019 applied to have the stay order lifted on the grounds: [6.1] The defendant has (allegedly) ignored “many” requests to mediate. [6.2] The urgent and interim nature of the proceedings will be undermined. Discussion [7] As to the first ground, Mr Steele has asserted “many” requests to mediate have been made by him to the defendant. However, onl...

3. [2013] NZEmpC 33 Mayne v Polychem Marketing Limited [pdf, 166 KB]

   ...acquiring a 49% shareholding in it in 1976. 1 [2011] NZERA Auckland 360. 2 For reasons set out in an interlocutory judgment: [2012] NZEmpC 60. 3 At [19]. In 1980 another company was formed (Mercator Chemical Company Limited), of which Mr Mayne was principal shareholder. It appears that by 1981 Mr Mayne was the sole director and shareholder of PNZ. 4 There is no doubt that Mr Mayne took a generous approach to remu...

4. Tainui - Arahura No 2A (2015) 30 Te Waipounamu MB 168 (30 TWP 168) [pdf, 209 KB]

   ...Tainui whānau ownership. History of ownership [13] This Court has previously determined ownership of the house on two separate occasions under s 30(1)(a) of the Māori Affairs Act 1953 (the 1953 Act). 3 The minutes from these hearings contain information about the background and history of the house and block and provide useful context for the issue currently before the Court. [14] In the late 1960s or early 1970s George’s uncle, another George Tainui known as Dennis or Dinny...

5. [2016] NZEmpC 31 A Labour Inspector v Taste of Egypt Limited [pdf, 473 KB]

   ...respondents were and are the directors of, and shareholders in, TOEL. The Labour Inspector (John Maxwell) brought proceedings against TOEL in the Employment Relations Authority, seeking to recover unpaid wages (and interest) in respect of two former employees of the company engaged at its Nelson restaurant. The Labour Inspector further claimed penalties against TOEL for:  failing to pay minimum wages;  failing to pay statutory holidays appropriately;  failing to...

6. [2013] NZEmpC 15 Vulcan-Steel Ltd v Wonnnocott [pdf, 125 KB]

   ...reference to a failure to take steps appears to refer to the December 2011 warning grievance raised by the letter of 21 March 2012. [16] On 8 May 2012 Sharp Tudhope raised a personal grievance with Vulcan in relation to Mr Wonnocott’s dismissal and requested Vulcan’s attendance at an urgent mediation. Vulcan responded by letter on 11 May 2012 but did not raise any question about the 90 day statutory limitation period for the December grievance in that letter. [17] It was only...

7. [2020] NZEmpC 172 New Zealand Technology Group Hawkes Bay Ltd v Flashoff [pdf, 340 KB]

   ...application for variation of the order to allow the payment of staff wages and relevant legal expenses would be filed. After hearing counsel, I timetabled that application for consideration on 22 October 2020. I also made one modification to the form of order and reissued it on that date. [3] The anticipated application for variation then came before the Court, and was considered at a hearing held on an urgent basis yesterday afternoon. After hearing detailed submissions, I iss...

8. Waitangi Tribunal - Wai 2522 2.5.0019 TPPA [pdf, 814 KB]

   ...recorded some preliminary concerns; however, we need to consider the evidence and submissions of the parties at hearing before coming to any concluded view. Accordingly, we are not in a position, at this point, to go further as . claimant counsel request and make findings that the process to date has been fundamentally inadequate. 20. We can, however, confirm that the focus of our second issue upon what Maori engagement is now required over steps needed to ratify the TPPA does clearly t...

9. [2011] NZEmpC 63 Hally Labels Ltd v Powell [pdf, 232 KB]

   ...Reasons: 16 June 2011 REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF JUDGE B S TRAVIS Introduction [1] On 13 June 2011, I issued two declarations and a permanent injunction enforcing a restraint. These are my reasons for so doing although they were issued in draft form to the parties on 13 June 2011. [2] In the hearing the plaintiff (Hally) sought to enforce a restraint preventing the defendant from being employed in any business in the adhesive label manufacturing industry within New Zealand o...

10. [2014] NZEmpC 159 Franix Construction Ltd v Tozer [pdf, 146 KB]

    ...representatives take notes during investigation meetings but none was adduced at this hearing. An Authority Member may also take his or her own notes of the evidence and although such documents may be relevant in judicial review proceedings, they do not form part of the very limited record from the Authority’s investigation on a challenge such as this. Counsel for one of the parties was also that party’s representative in the Authority but was not permitted to give evidence fr...