Search Results

1. [2021] NZEmpC 23 O’Boyle v McCue [pdf, 190 KB]

   ...have regard to the conduct of the parties tending to increase or contain costs. Further, the Court’s Guideline Scale is not intended to replace the Court’s discretion to fix a reasonable sum for costs.3 [9] The first issue raised concerns a request made for Ms McCue’s medical records; this issue became the subject of an interlocutory judgment.4 The parties have agreed that in respect of that judgment, there should be a contribution to costs under the Guideline Scale in the...

2. [2017] NZEmpC 85 Ramkissoon v Commissioner of New Zealand Police [pdf, 668 KB]

   ...force in 1 April 2011. 3 See Angus v Ports of Auckland Ltd [2011] NZEmpC 160, [2011] ERNZ 466. 4 Allen v C3 Ltd [2012] NZEmpC 124, [2012] ERNZ 478. not have retrospective effect. It was also significant that, in both its new and old forms, s 103A focuses on the actions of the employer at the time of dismissal. The Court also found significant ss 17 and 18 of the Interpretation Act 1999 which provide: 17 Effect of repeal generally (1) The repeal of an enactment doe...

3. [2021] NZEnvC 115 Te Whanau a Kai Trust v Gisborne District Council [pdf, 9.4 MB]

   ...1991 (RMA) to assist the Council to carry out its regional functions in relation to freshwater. 2 [4] The Plan was notified on 10 October 2015. The 'decisions version' of the Plan was issued in August 2017 .3 [5] The Freshwater Plan forms part of the Tairawhiti Resource Management Plan, the Council's single planning document, which includes the Regional Policy Statement (RPS) and regional and district plans. It contains the RPS provisions and the regional plan provi...

4. [2015] NZEmpC 28 Stevens v Hapag-Lloyd (NZ) Ltd [pdf, 307 KB]

   ...[HL Ltd] will be made available.” The proposal was that there would be two available positions in the Sales Support Team, namely a Sales Support Coordinator and a Sales Support Manager position. [8] Feedback from Mrs Stevens was sought, and a form enclosed for that purpose. She was advised that the feedback would be reviewed and that changes or adjustments to the proposal would then be made. She was also advised that a further meeting would be scheduled with her to discuss the...

5. [2023] NZEmpC 170 FGH v RST [pdf, 283 KB]

   ...history briefly. [50] Letters were sent by Mr Henderson on 14 June 2021 raising the possibility of limited arbitration followed by mediation, and again on 17 June 2021 proposing mediation. Ms Richards responded on 18 June 2021, acknowledging the request that the parties attend urgent mediation, and stating that RST fully supported this occurring, and that it should take place no later than 9 July 2021, and preferably much earlier. [51] On 2 July 2021, Mr Henderson wrote to Ms Richa...

6. ONC v MDT [2012] NZIACDT 29 (18 June 2012) [pdf, 74 KB]

   ...into paying more fees. [17] Mr ONC said he made repeated demands for the return of his documents, whereas Mr MDT says there was no such contact, and he had no means of knowing where he could send the documents. [18] In the absence of further information, the minute gave notice that Mr MDT had produced records that accounted for the fees charged, and paid. 4 [19] Those records appeared to document Mr MDT’s claim that he properly agreed on the payment of fees with M...

7. N Ltd v BS & TS [2023] NZDT 164 (9 May 2023) [pdf, 183 KB]

   ...consumer’s right of redress is to refuse to pay more than a reasonable price. Was the price fixed by contract? 5. There was no written contract between the parties. N Ltd did not give a quote or estimate for the work, and there was no agreed formula for determining the price. Although N Ltd has done other work for BS and TS’ business, there was no course of dealing between the parties to determine the cost of this particular project. https://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/pub...

8. [2011] NZEmpC 80 NZ Professional Firefighters Union v NZ Fire Service Commission [pdf, 96 KB]

   ...On 2 May 2011 the parties, not having reached agreement in the course of their collective bargaining commenced in late 2010, discussed ways to address this as required by cl 10(a) of the BPA. It was agreed that the Commission would prepare its form of collective agreement which the Union would put to a vote of members. As a matter of law, this would not have been a ratification vote because the parties had not settled a collective agreement and indeed had not agreed upon its conte...

9. Bott v Standing [2012] NZIACDT 44 (24 August 2012) [pdf, 109 KB]

   ...agreement for Golden Sands. However, the signature is not readable, so whether Mr Standing or someone on his behalf signed is not clear. [18] At the time the agreement was signed and the fees paid, only Mr Standing was licensed. [19] In May 2009, the forms to prepare an expression of interest were delivered to Mr and Ms Bott from Mr Standing’s practice. [20] In a letter dated 16 June 2009, Mr Standing wrote to Mr Bott saying the first payment of fees had just been received. In fact...

10. Jenkins v Matauri X Incorporation - Matauri X Incorporation (2005) 101 Whangārei MB 100 (101 WH 100) [pdf, 4.8 MB]

    ...and the options discussed to resolve the Incorporation's immediate business difficullies. MB Ref: 101 WH 100·122 3 The hearing of the substantive issues resumed (following the 22 - 23 May 2003 hearing) on 07 July 2003. The Court was informed that Bridgecorp had filed an application for a Declaratory Judgement in the High Court, as to the validity of its mortgage security. At a hearing on 3 December 2003, the Interim Administrator reported that Bridgecorp's High Court...