Search Results

1. [2014] NZEmpC 235 Rutherford Street Kindergarten v Chilton [pdf, 119 KB]

   ...included approval for NZEI to refer the matter to Mediation Services or to the Authority, or to seek any other relevant information. [12] On 8 June 2011, the NZEI Field Officer wrote to RSK confirming that she was supporting Ms Chilton, and requesting a meeting to discuss the following issues: Her 2010 appraisal outlining her competence in undertaking her role. Progression on the administration pay scale as per part 6(g), page 20. The Administration job description...

2. BU v DG LCRO 276 / 2011 (17 September 2013) [pdf, 102 KB]

   ...correspondence makes much of BU’s purported delays in providing a note of his fees, and that he had not even given an indication of what his fees might be. I note that, as counsel, BU was not obliged to provide an estimate of fees unless DN had requested one, and in any event BU would have provided a note of his fees to his instructing solicitor BZ, not directly to DN. [22] The correspondence does not support an allegation that BU delayed in providing a note of his fees. The c...

3. King v Te Aretoa - Succession to Puti Green [2021] Chief Judges MB 132 (2021 CJ 132) [pdf, 408 KB]

   ...reference to an earlier decision on the estate of Alec Green. From this, the Court determined that the deceased’s father and Wiari Green must have shared a common hapū being that associated with the land at Kinohaku. [29] Extensive research was requested of both Court staff and a contractor including reference to Wakatū Incorporation. That showed that the interests in Wakatū Incorporation that the deceased had not inherited from her mother came to her through her father and he...

4. Taueki v Horowhenua 11 (Lake) Māori Reservation Trust [pdf, 296 KB]

   ...court's findings under section 45(2): (c) the hardship that would be caused to the applicant if the costs were not paid by the Commissioner. (4) For the purposes of subsection (3)(c), the Commissioner may require any person to furnish information on the financial circumstances and needs of the applicant. (5) If, having regard to the matters specified in subsection (3) and to any information received under subsection (4), and to all relevant circumstances, the Commissioner c...

5. [2012] NZEmpC 40 Kaipara v Carter Holt Harvey Limited [pdf, 170 KB]

   ...meeting with CHH management (Mr Trow, Mr Vincent and Kay Mead, the company‟s health and safety manager) on 26 January 2010. He was accompanied by a support person. Further investigation was conducted at that meeting after which Mr Kaipara was requested to attend yet a further meeting with the company on 29 January 2010. Its concerns or allegations were set out in the letter calling the 29 January meeting and Mr Kaipara was advised expressly that his dismissal was a possible c...

6. Zhang v CAC20005 & Anor [2015] NZREADT 39 [pdf, 239 KB]

   ...$634,500 even if that misleading statement is induced in any way by a transposing of figures. Discussion [78] We emphasise that in this appeal we have had no participation whatsoever from the complainant but she seems to have given evidence in various forms to the Committee in the usual way. [79] We consider that the Committee has issued a clear and just decision. For all that has been so thoroughly covered before us, the licensee made a misleading statement which we accept to be in...

7. BORA Criminal Justice Reform Bill [pdf, 398 KB]

   Criminal Justice Reform Bill 20 November 2006 Attorney-General LEGAL ADVICE CONSISTENCY WITH THE NEW ZEALAND BILL OF RIGHTS ACT 1990: CRIMINAL JUSTICE REFORM BILL Our Ref: ATT395/22 1. We have considered the Criminal Justice Reform Bill (PCO 7194/13) and conclude that it is not inconsistent with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 (BORA). 2. We have discussed a number of issues in detail below. To summarise, our conclusions are: 2.1 The retrospective nature of the propo...

8. MacGregor v Craig (Limited Extension of Confidentiality Orders) [2016] NZHRRT 30 [pdf, 241 KB]

   ...decisions of the Tribunal or Chairperson given prior to 2 March 2016 or after 2 March 2016. [55.3] There is to be no search of the Tribunal file without leave of the Chairperson or of the Tribunal. The plaintiff and defendant are to be notified of any request to search the file and given an opportunity to be heard on that application. COSTS [56] While costs in respect of the substantive decision have been resolved, costs in relation to the hearings on 16 May 2016 and 30 August 2016...

9. LCRO 62/2017 & LCRO 63/2017 HC and RE v DL (9 January 2020) [pdf, 239 KB]

   ...(that is, the other addressees of her earlier email to him were not copied in) saying: …Please see clause 15 in the sale and purchase agreement. This explains why a draft pre-contract disclosure statement is attached. We are comfortable the form of agreement is binding (as is our client’s bank). (Section 146 of the Unit Titles Act should really be amended to give some guidance for pre-sale agreements.) … [13] Ms RE’s response is the questioned email. [14] Mr HC supported...

10. JM v Minister for NZSIS (Application for Non-Publication Orders) [2022] NZHRRT 32 [pdf, 182 KB]

    ...Minister’s 1 [This decision is to be cited as JM v Minister for NZSIS (Application for Non-Publication Orders) [2022] NZHRRT 32.] IN THE HUMAN RIGHTS REVIEW TRIBUNAL [2022] NZHRRT 32 I TE TARAIPIUNARA MANA TANGATA 2 responses to JM’s requests for his personal information under information privacy principle (IPP) 6. The Minister generally denies any interference with JM’s privacy. The information requests and responses [2] On 16 March 2020 JM requested any inform...