Search Results

1. [2022] NZEmpC 118 New Zealand Post Primary Teachers’ Association v Board of Trustees for Rodney College [pdf, 519 KB]

   ...Authority BETWEEN NEW ZEALAND POST PRIMARY TEACHERS’ ASSOCIATION Plaintiff AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES FOR RODNEY COLLEGE First Defendant AND THE SECRETARY FOR EDUCATION Second Defendant Hearing: 22–25 March 2021 Further submissions filed on 26 July, 2 and 9 August 2021 (Heard at Wellington) Appearances: P Cranney, counsel for plaintiff No appearance for first defendant S Hornsby-Geluk and M Vant, counsel for second defendant...

2. Yong-Mewburn v CAC 404 & Coulter and Moore [2016] NZREADT 62 [pdf, 97 KB]

   ...she was told of this while she was overseas 3 in Canada. She subsequently discussed it over the telephone with her manager and then there was an email exchange with Mr Rose. She was instructed to talk to the vendor’s solicitor to get a clause prepared by the solicitor to insert in the agreement for sale and purchase addressing the issue. Mr Rose’s email also told her to disclose this to potential purchasers. Ms Yong-Mewburn did talk to the solicitor and a clause was d...

3. ABT Ltd v ZYJ Ltd [2013] NZDT 71 (5 June 2013) [pdf, 75 KB]

   IN THE DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2013] NZDT 71 BETWEEN ABT Ltd APPLICANT AND ZYJ Ltd RESPONDENT Date of Order: 5 June 2013 Referee: Referee Avia ORDER OF THE DISPUTES TRIBUNAL The Tribunal hereby orders that ZYJ Ltd is to pay ABT Ltd the sum of $5,151.29 on or before 19 June 2013. Facts [1] On the evening of 19 May 2012, a truck belonging to ZYJ Ltd collided with a door in a building owned by ABT Ltd. [2] ZYJ delivered goods to a cust

4. ABG v ZYW [2011] NZDT 88 (5 September 2011) [pdf, 71 KB]

   ...ZUX RESPONDENT AND ZUW LTD SECOND RESPONDENT Date of Order: 19 August 2011 Referee: Referee Benson ORDER OF THE DISPUTES TRIBUNAL The Tribunal hereby orders that ZUW Ltd is to pay $1,500 to AEY within ten days of the date of this order. The claim by AEY against ZUX is dismissed. Facts [1] AEY (the landlord of a residential property) sought $1,500 from the Respondents (the managing agents) to recover funds paid by t

5. [2019] NZEmpC 116 Watts & Hughes Construction Ltd v de Buyzer [pdf, 235 KB]

   ...1 De Buyzer v Watts & Hughes Construction Ltd [2018] NZERA Christchurch 155. [3] The issues raised in the challenge are: (a) whether the Authority erred in its determination as to the effect of the 90-day trial clause in Mr de Buyzer’s individual employment agreement, as a matter of fact and/or as a matter of law; and (b) whether the Authority erred as a matter of fact and/or as a matter of law when it rejected Watts & Hughes’ claim for fina...

6. Te Whare - Succession to Peter Ateha Joseph Reneti Te Whare (2020) 67 Te Waipounamu MB 275 (67 TWP 275) [pdf, 217 KB]

   ...specific bequests to his children including “Putea Aroha 100% to Tracey Roka Habib from the Lake Taupō Forest Trust – New Zealand”. [3] The second will dated 19 November 2019 (the Australian will) was signed only five days before his death. Clause 1 states: 1. AUSTRALIAN WILL I DECLARE that this Will shall only affect my real and personal estate located or arising in Australia and its territories. I REVOKE all former Wills and parts thereof affecting only my real and per...

7. BORA Parole Amendment Bill [pdf, 314 KB]

   ...Crown Counsel Bookmarks [1] Explanatory note to the Bill at page 3. [2] Explanatory note to the Bill at page 1. [3] Clauses 9 and 10, which amend s 21(2) and insert new s 21A(a) into the Parole Act 2002. [4] The effect of a postponement order is that the two-year interval in s 21(2) does not apply and an offender need not be reconsidered for parole for i...

8. [2024] NZEmpC 226 Glenfield College BOT & Ors v Anderson [pdf, 272 KB]

   ...discuss the required factors under the CEA. [12] Mr McKinley’s letter stated that the process he was conducting accorded with cl 2.5 of the CEA, and set out in full the provisions he said were relevant. At this point it suffices to note that the clauses Mr McKinley set out, and which he said he would be applying, were clauses from the CEA 2019-2022, not the CEA 2017-2019 that Mrs Anderson’s IEA referred to. That reliance was problematic, for reasons I will come to. [13] One...

9. [2024] NZEmpC 226 Glenfield College BOT & Ors v Anderson [pdf, 365 KB]

   ...discuss the required factors under the CEA. [12] Mr McKinley’s letter stated that the process he was conducting accorded with cl 2.5 of the CEA, and set out in full the provisions he said were relevant. At this point it suffices to note that the clauses Mr McKinley set out, and which he said he would be applying, were clauses from the CEA 2019-2022, not the CEA 2017-2019 that Mrs Anderson’s IEA referred to. That reliance was problematic, for reasons I will come to. [13] One...

10. Y v Secretary for Justice [2023] NZRA 004 (12 April 2023) [pdf, 269 KB]

    ...substantial and active involvement in at least 4 approval level 3 or 4 criminal proceedings where at least 1 of those proceedings is an approval level 4 criminal proceeding. [3] An “approval level 4 criminal proceeding” is defined as follows in clause 1 of the Regulations: approval level 4 criminal proceedings means any proceeding where the person charged— (a) is charged with— (i) an offence listed in Schedule 1 of the Criminal Procedure Act 2011; or (ii) any offence not...