7638 items matching your search terms
CRAIG BROWN v THE CLINICIAN HOLDINGS LIMITED [2025] NZEmpC 48 [17 March 2025] IN THE EMPLOYMENT COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND I TE KŌTI TAKE MAHI O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU [2025] NZEmpC 48 EMPC 355/2023 IN THE MATTER OF an application for a declaration under s 6(5) of the Employment Relations Act 2000 BETWEEN CRAIG BROWN Plaintiff AND THE CLINICIAN HOLDINGS LIMITED Defendant Hearing: 21–25 October 2024 Appearance
...Gascoigne Wicks, PO Box 2, Blenheim qdavies@gwlaw.co.nz bfletcher@gwlaw.co.nz Michael Wenley, Willis Toomey Robinson Lawyers, Private Bate 6018, Napier 4142, mwenley@wtr.co.nz 32 Tākitimu MB 175 Introduction [1] On 17 October 2011 Samuel Gemmell filed an application for costs against the trustees of the Mohaka A4 Trust (“the Trust”). The application arises out of review proceedings which were dealt with in my judgment of 9 September 2011. 1 The applicant now seeks costs...
...Code against Ms Ramos: (1) failing to provide the complainant with sufficient immigration advice to enable her to make an informed decision as to how to proceed with her immigration matters, in breach of cls 1 and 2(e); and (2) failing to make file notes or to provide written confirmation to the complainant recording any immigration advice supplied and failing to advise her that the visa application had been lodged, in breach of cl 26(a)(iii), (b) and (c). JURISDICTION AND PROCE...
...received and is more than double the number of applications received in the 2014/2015 reporting period, as shown in the chart below. At the end of the reporting period 105 cases were on hand. The following chart shows a comparison of new applications filed from 1 July 2014 to 30 June 2025. 2 The 716 new applications received came from throughout the country. The pie chart below shows the location of the motor vehicle trader (where the vehicle was purchased) broken d...
...[4] This proceeding has had a long history. The most significant delay has been as a result of fresh allegations of improper use of trust funds being made at the hearing held on 23 March 2012 some 7 months after the original application had been filed, and as a result of such claims, through the efforts to procure the services of an independent auditor to finalise and audit the accounts of the trust. This report was not completed until September 2012, some 13 months after the filing o...
...commence a challenge by way of a de novo hearing against a determination of the Employment Relations Authority at Hamilton on 13 February 2007. Through oversight on behalf of both the plaintiff and her counsel, Mr Hammond, the period of time for filing a challenge against the determination was allowed to expire. The Court has a discretion to grant leave conferred by s219 of the Employment Relations Act 2000. In anticipation of leave being granted, the plaintiff has filed with the...
...with High Court Rules 7. At paragraphs 2.3 and 2.4 of his memorandum, counsel for the first respondent draws an analogy with the provisions of rule 20.4 of the High Court Rules. He notes that the rule provides for a 20 working day time limit for filing an appeal in the High Court and provides the Court with a power to extend the time for filing an appeal. He notes, by way of contrast, that the Act [the Real Estate Agents Act 2008] contains no such provision or power for appeals to the...
...not the claim meets the eligibility criteria. [4] I have considered the following documents in conducting my review: • The application for review and attached information. • The letter dated 13 August 2009 from Johnson Pritchard Fee and Partners to the Chief Executive. • The assessor’s report dated 24 April 2009. • The letter from Scott Murray of the Department of Building and Housing to the claimants dated 24 August 2009 advising that the Chief Execut...
...contacted DD two or three days prior to the mediation to be held on 11 March 2014 and asked DD to attend the mediation with him. The two men met for two hours the day before the mediation (on which date a letter of engagement was given to CX detailing fees and terms), and spent approximately seven hours at the mediation itself on 11 March. [3] The following day there were two lengthy phone conversations between the parties about the settlement reached at mediation. CX signed the...
...for rehearing that I have before me. [10] I t1lerefore dismissed this application at hearing advising that I would provide reasons later. The above constitutes t1lOse reasons. The application by the Johnston faction [11] This application was filed in very broad terms and drafted by Mr Hawea on behalf of the tmstees without legal advice. Botll in his application and in person Mr Hawea attacked the judgment in its terms, basically on the basis that it was wrong in fact and in tikang...