10901 items matching your search terms
...2016) for the following reasons: i. he did not have time to complete the work; ii. he had not finalised the fee arrangements — the agreed $2,000 did not cover “further meetings”; iii. Mr AK had not provided the additional information requested in September 2015; and 11 At [23]. 12 At [27]–[28]. 8 iv. Mr AK’s father had become violent and aggressive towards Mr AJ. d) The finding of negligence and incompetence...
...1 LCRO 27/2017. 2 whether the contract was binding. Ms KP contended that the agreement bound Ms HK’s company to complete the sale. [5] Ms HK did not consider that her company was bound by the contract. [6] Ms KP sued for specific performance. Mr WZ represented Ms KP. [7] Ms HK engaged Mr TX. [8] A hearing commenced in the High Court, but on the second day of the hearing, a settlement was agreed by the parties. The agreement was recorded by the court in a consent order
...$75,000 on the Trust’s facility (comprising separate amounts of $61,000 and $14,000) and transferred those amounts to the Trust’s STA ledger. The narrations for the two transfers were “Westpac – drawdown” and “Westpac – further funds as requested – transfer to J K L & G H I”. 39 On 23 June 2005 Mr Williams paid $12,500 from the Trust’s STA ledger to JKL by cheque. The narration for this payment is “J K L Ltd”. 40 On 8 July 2005 Mr Williams transferred $...
...contingency plan and to take all reasonable and practical steps to ensure that LPS can be provided without the assistance of the Union. However, in the event that any DHB determines it is unable to do so without the assistance of the Union, a request may be made to it within 24 hours after the industrial action is notified. [7] This case concerns the way in which such a request must be resolved. Each DHB and the Union are required to meet within four days after the notification t...
...of defence consists of a series of admissions and denials. Insofar as the employment agreement for the first defendant, Paul Morgan, is concerned, this cannot be located. However, he admits in the statement of defence that it was in the same form as that of the first defendant, Ms Wilson. The Authority’s determination [9] The determination consists of a traversal of ss 12, 16, 29, 30, 34 and 40 of the Holidays Act and a consideration of the statement of agreed facts filed in...
...December 2004 from the Registrar to the appellant setting out the consequences of him not doing so. Such correspondence continued through to 24 March 2005, when a letter dated 24 March 2005 was delivered to the appellant’s letterbox by Ms Bullen, requesting access to his house at the property. The appellant admitted that under cross examination. Until that point, the appellant had been asserting that the sale took place without his knowledge and without an opportunity to let the agent...
...Resolving that issue requires consideration of a number of subsidiary and inter-related issues: (a) What was the nature of the benefit conferred by cl 17.4? Was it annual holidays for the purposes of s 16(1) of the Holidays Act 2003 or some other form of paid leave? (b) After 1 April 2007, what was the effect on cl 17.1 of the 2005 collective agreement of s 6(3) of the Holidays Act 2003? (c) How is s 6(3) of the Holidays Act 2003 to be applied to a collective agreement? In...
...Issue 1 – Was Mr Brill an “employee”? [35] As can be seen from the narration of the background in this decision, Mr Brill has repeatedly told the Law Society that he was an employee of B E Brill Ltd. He has done this in letters, in signed forms, including declarations, and in person at interview. Further, at one point he provided the Law Society with a copy of an employment agreement which he initially presented as being in place between himself and B E Brill Ltd. [36] On...
...land modification is required. If a structure or object is placed on or removed from the relevant land, or if the land is otherwise modified or damaged, the factual basis to invoke s 19(1)(ba) of the Act is established. But of course, not all forms of land modification should be susceptible to the threat of injunction. There must be a threshold at which land modification moves into injunction territory. What is that threshold? 20 In Dobson - Edgecombe Block X Section 12B...
...documentation had been signed, but not registered. 37. On 10 June 2020, the Practitioner emailed KK advising he had made amendments to the documents he had prepared to support the Subsidy Application, further to instructions obtained from K and N, and requesting K to confirm whether the proposed recording of the $515,000 transfer in connection with the purchase of the Property “would be acceptable”.20 38. On 12 June 2020, KK replied to the Practitioner’s email of 10 June 2020, st...