Search Results

1. [2020] NZEmpC 131 Surplus Brokers Ltd v Armstrong [pdf, 174 KB]

   ...the communication did not amount to notification of a dismissal. The relevant context was that Mr Armstrong was part-way through a period of casual employment when he received the communication. Even accepting that Mr Caspersen did not make a request for return of the work shirts during the 84-second telephone call on 8 April 2018, he plainly made the request in writing shortly afterwards. Mr Armstrong was required to wear a work shirt while attending assignments for the company....

2. LCRO 77/2021 GS and VU v CN and SW (23 March 2022) [pdf, 149 KB]

   ...appropriate for [Law Firm A] to pass on the costs associated with the phone calls in the way it did.”4 [20] The Committee also took note of the fact that other practitioners who had assisted Mrs MM did not pass on the costs of unnecessary calls and formed the view that “the effect of their billing was to earn significant fees as a consequence of her inability to make rational decisions about how to engage with her legal representatives”.5 2 Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (...

3. [2019] NZEmpC 145 A Labour Inspector v Parihar [pdf, 368 KB]

   ...had not paid or provided to the employees: a) Holiday pay when their employment was terminated within 12 months of service in respect of M, V and G. b) Holiday pay for B, T and K. c) Holiday pay and an alternative day whenever work was performed on a public holiday. d) Holiday pay where the public holiday was not worked but was an otherwise working day. 88. The plaintiff calculated the employees were owed holiday pay of: Arrears of public holiday...

4. Report of the NZ Prostitution Law Committee 2008 [pdf, 642 KB]

   Report of the Prostitution Law Review Committee on the Operation of the Prostitution Reform Act 2003 2 © Crown Copyright Published May 2008 Ministry of Justice PO Box 180 Wellington New Zealand ISBN 978-0-478-29052-7 Disclaimer The views, opinions, findings and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this

5. Auckland Standards Committee v Ram [2014] NZLCDT 76 [pdf, 103 KB]

   ...in Issue 3 “Yes”. Issue 4 - Was the non-compliance wilful or reckless? [30] We consider that the Standards Committee has made out a strong case to infer the non-compliance is wilful or reckless. He has an obligation to comply with lawful requests of the Standards Committee. His correspondence is lengthy, tangential, self-serving and evasive. [31] Section 7(1)(a)(ii) defines wilful or reckless breaches of the Rules or the Act as misconduct. [32] Thus the Standards Committ...

6. Nairn v Peebles LCRO 109 / 2010 (14 December 2010) [pdf, 100 KB]

   ...defective, or that the purchasers had agreed to accept the title with the defect. [4] The contract was conditional upon the vendor undertaking a due diligence enquiry, a condition that was to be fulfilled by 6 July 2009. The purchaser made two requests for extensions of time which were granted and the contract become unconditional on 24 July 2009. The settlement date of 31 July remained unchanged. [5] On 24 July, after being informed that the contract was now unconditional,...

7. TR Environmental Law Conference Judge Newhook Paper [pdf, 156 KB]

   ...Principal Environment Judge Although legal rights exist, the cost of effective participation often places limits on a party’s ability to participate. What can be done to increase access to justice, maximise efficiency and minimise cost? Traditional forms of ADR as well as alternative hearing processes introduced by legislation and by the Court itself attempt to address these issues. This session will provide a summary of the varied forms of dispute resolution and guidance on the benefit...

8. Tamati v Hond - Paora Aneti 17 & 18 (2022) 446 Aotea MB 184 (446 AOT 184) [pdf, 252 KB]

   ...March 2022 was filed by Aroaro Tamati with the support of 13 other beneficiaries, setting out the reasons for the injunction sought (“the letter”). The letter provides: We as beneficiaries of Paora Āneti 17 & 18 and uri of Ngā Māhanga request an injunction by the Aotea Māori Land Court to prevent the holding of the upcoming AGM for Paora Aneti 17 & 18 on 20 March 2022. The reason for our request are our serious concerns about the unmandated changes that have been ma...

9. [2019] NZEnvC 160 Hawthenden Limited v Queenstown Lakes District Council [pdf, 21 MB]

   BEFORE THE ENVIRONMENT COURT I MUA I TE KOOTI TAIAO O AOTEAROA Court: Hearing: Appearances: IN THE MATTER AND BETWEEN AND Decision No. [2019) NZEnvC 160 of the Resource Management Act 1991 of appeals under clause 14 of the First Schedule of the Act concerning Topic 2: Sub-topic 1 of the Proposed Queenstown Lakes District Plan HAWTHENDEN LIMITED (ENV-2018-CHC-55) UPPER CLUTHA ENVIRONMENTAL SOCIETY (INC) (ENV-2018-CHC-56) SEVEN ALBERT TOWN PROPERTY OWNERS (E

10. Sanders v King - Part Parish of Whangape Lot 15B Block and Parish of Whangape Lot 15C (Urupa) (2014) 81 Waikato Maniapoto MB 109 (81 WMN 109) [pdf, 216 KB]

    ...[17] I subsequently issued a direction on 19 June 2014 that the initial confirmation decision had to be made by the Registrar. I recorded in that direction that if the Registrar refused to grant confirmation then Janice Sanders had the option of requesting the Court to deal with the application pursuant to s 160(6) of the Act. [18] The Registrar subsequently issued a decision on 24 June 2014 advising the parties that confirmation was refused. On 26 June 2014, the solicitors acting f...