17498 items matching your search terms
...Nelson’s weekly compensation, incorrectly fixed the date of reinstatement as 15 August 2017, whereas the correct date was 19 August 2014. [78] This appeal is therefore allowed, and the review decision is set aside. [79] Mr Nelson is entitled to costs. If these cannot be agreed within one month, I shall determine the issue following the filing of memoranda. P R Spiller District Court Judge Solicitors: Medico Law for the respondent
...entitled to continued entitlements. [103] Accordingly, I find that AON’s decision of 18 March 2017 was correct. Therefore, the appellant is not entitled to entitlements. Accordingly, the appeal must be dismissed. [104] There is no issue as to costs. Judge C J McGuire District Court Judge Solicitors: Claro, Wellington for the respondent
...diagnosis of post traumatic stress disorder and that she has satisfied the criteria for a work-related mental injury. [85] Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the review decision of 18 May 2021 is quashed. [86] If there is any issue as to costs, the parties have leave to file memoranda in respect thereof. Judge C J McGuire District Court Judge Solicitors: Claro, Wellington Hazel Armstrong Law, Wellington
...Decision [52] The threshold requirements to grant a permanent injunction per ss 19(1)(a), (ba) and (c) of the Act are not satisfied. [53] The application is dismissed. [54] None of the parties were legally represented. There is no order as to costs. 468 Aotea MB 106 Kupu whakamutunga Concluding remarks [55] The dismissal of this injunction application will not resolve the current issues on the island. In part, that is because the use of the A1B block appears li...
...almost four years after settlement, the purchaser sent an email to Ms Wilson stating that after consulting his lawyer, he was of the view that the unconsented work on the second kitchen should have been disclosed. He asserted that the remediation costs would have to be met by the vendor or the agent. Complaint to the Authority [17] The purchaser made a complaint to the Real Estate Agents Authority (the Authority) on about 9 February 2021. He said the property was set up, viewed and...
...irresponsible for the Court to leave matters with the Trust in its current state. [83] The Trust does appear to be using land that it does not own. There is no evidence that the trust has a licence or right to use that land. The obligation and cost of removing those materials from land that it does not own is for the Trust. The Trust and its trustees do not have the luxury of simply saying that they will move them when they have time and opportunity to do so. Kupu Whakatau De...
...amended on 22 June 2023. 3 that this was also unsatisfactory conduct. In a penalty decision issued on [date], it censured or reprimanded the defendant (it does not say which), fined her $2,000 ($1,000 for each breach) and ordered her to pay costs of $1,395 to the purchasers. [6] The liability decision of the Committee was upheld by the Tribunal (differently constituted from the current panel) on [date]. It left open an appeal by the purchasers and a cross-appeal by the defen...
...degenerative condition of the right sternoclavicular joint and no causal link can be established. As a result, ACC has had to revoke the decision of 28/11/19 and has declined cover for this injury. This means that ACC is not able to help with treatment costs or other support for your injury from 26/8/22. [5] The issues arising agreed by the parties are whether a causal link can be established between Mr Parish’s accident on 13 November 2019 and the injuries for which cover had...
...correctly declined cover and funding for surgery to treat Mr Jones’ L4/5 foraminal narrowing with nerve root compression. The decision of the Reviewer dated 30 October 2023 is therefore upheld. This appeal is dismissed. [84] I make no order as to costs. P R Spiller District Court Judge Solicitors for the Respondent: Medico Law Ltd.
...the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006. Orders [59] The Committee determined that Mr PK’s conduct:18 … was at the low end of unsatisfactory and determined that Mr PK pay to the Law Society: a. a fine of $1,500.00. Section 156(1)(i) b. costs of $750. Section 156(1)(n) Mr PK’s application for review [60] Mr PK advised that “the basis of [his] application for a review of the decision is that the Committee failed to correctly interpret and apply the Rules that the Commit...