18202 items matching your search terms
...Limited) (Broadspectrum). Mr Nathan was reinstated by the Authority but challenges the decision that he be reinstated to a position no less advantageous to him rather than to his former position. He also challenges the decision to decline him costs. 2 1 Nathan v Transfield Services (New Zealand) Ltd [2015] NZERA Wellington 120 2 Broadspectrum (New Zealand) Ltd (formerly Transfield Services (New Zealand) Ltd v Nathan [2016] N...
...has sought a review of two determinations of the Standards Committee in which the Committee determined to take no further action in respect of the complaints against both Mr HT and Mrs LM but ordered Mrs LM to pay the sum of $1000 on account of costs on the basis that the proceedings were justified. [3] Mrs LM has sought a review of the determination because of the costs order against her. Background [4] In July 2010 Mr CS approached Mr QA, a lawyer in the North Island, for advice...
...constitutes an attempt to abuse the court’s processes. Finally, she submits that Highmark Homes’ actions have forced her into financial hardship and that she would be in a better financial position if she had never been employed by them. 1 Watkins v Highmark Homes Ltd [2023] NZERA 418. 2 Watkins v Highmark Homes Ltd [2022] NZERA 632. 3 Watkins v Highmark Homes Ltd [2022] NZERA 638; and Watkins v Highmark Homes Ltd [2020] NZERA 467. 4 Watkins v Highmark Homes Ltd [2...
...& ASSOCIATES LTD WN 23 March 2010 IN THE EMPLOYMENT COURT WELLINGTON [2010] NZEMPC 25 WRC 18/09 IN THE MATTER OF a challenge to a determination of the Employment Relations Authority AND IN THE MATTER OF an application for costs BETWEEN NARINDER PAL SINGH Plaintiff AND ERIC JAMES & ASSOCIATES LIMITED Defendant Hearing: By memoranda of submissions filed on 2 February, 3 and 15 March 2010 Judgment: 23 March 2010 COSTS JUDGMENT OF CHIEF JUDGE...
...NZEmpC WN [2023] NZEmpC 194 [15 November 2012] IN THE EMPLOYMENT COURT WELLINGTON [2023] NZEmpC 194 WRC 16/09 IN THE MATTER OF proceedings removed from the Employment Relations Authority AND IN THE MATTER OF an application for costs BETWEEN ELIZABETH GRACE STRACHAN Plaintiff AND ROBERT ALEXANDER MOODIE (ALSO KNOWN AS "MISS ALICE") TRADING AS MOODIE & CO, A LAW FIRM First Defendant AND ROBERT ALEXANDER MOODIE Second defenda...
...INFINITY AUTOMOTIVE LIMITED Defendant Hearing: (on papers dated 17 August to 4 September 2018) Appearances: P Lorigan, in person R Towner and B Norrie, counsel for defendant Judgment: 11 September 2018 COSTS JUDGMENT OF JUDGE B A CORKILL Introduction [1] This judgment quantifies the costs which should be paid by Mr Lorigan to Infinity Automotive Ltd (Infinity) as a result of orders made in two interlocutory judgments.1...
...KŌTI TAKE MAHI O AOTEAROA TE WHANGANUI-A-TARA [2025] NZEmpC 230 EMPC 54/2025 IN THE MATTER OF a challenge to a determination of the Employment Relations Authority AND IN THE MATTER OF an application for security for costs BETWEEN MARIA AGUIRRE Plaintiff AND KAH NEW ZEALAND LIMITED Defendant Hearing: On the papers Appearances: A Halse, advocate for plaintiff B Edwards, counsel for defendant Judgment: 29...
...challenge to a determination of the Employment Relations Authority BETWEEN WESTPAC BANKING CORPORATION Plaintiff AND RAEWYN SMYTHE Defendant Hearing: By memoranda filed on 23 February and 9 March 2006 Judgment: 30 June 2006 at Noon COSTS JUDGMENT OF JUDGE A A COUCH [1] On 10 February 2006 I gave my substantive judgment in this matter (number AC 5/06). I concluded by observing that each party had been partially successful and partially unsuccessful and expressed t...
...Respondent AND NEW ZEALAND POLICE Second Respondent Hearing: On the papers Submissions: H Armstrong for the Appellant J Maltby for the Second Respondent Judgment: 21 March 2023 RESERVED JUDGMENT OF JUDGE P R SPILLER [Claim for costs, Part 14 District Court Rules 2014] Introduction [1] This is an appeal from the decision of a Reviewer dated 13 August 2021. The Reviewer quashed the decision of the New Zealand Police (“the Police”), dated 11 March 2021...
...1. On 22 August 2022, the applicants’ car was towed by the respondent from a private car park in [City]. The applicants paid $420.00 to have the car released. The applicants claim the respondent did not have the right to tow their car and that the costs claimed to tow the car were not reasonable. The applicants claim $1,055.80 from the respondent which includes the $420.00 fee to tow the car, the Tribunal’s filing fee of $45.00 and $509.80 for costs, including the costs to prepare for...