Search Results

1. [2021] NZACC 14 - Folland v ACC (12 January 2021) [pdf, 241 KB]

   ...and Production Clerk. [15] In a review decision dated 27 April 2015 that decision was quashed because the Reviewer determined the IRP had been unlawful. The decision itself was then revoked by the respondent. [16] In March 2016 the appellant requested the respondent to assist him with funding to start up his own computer business. [17] In October 2017, having obtained a complex medical specialist report from Dr Xiong, the respondent recommenced the vocational independence pro...

2. [2022] NZCAA 01 (28 February 2022) [pdf, 338 KB]

   ...company. [2] The dispute in the appeal is: [2.1] The Appellant says the royalty payments are separate from the value of the goods the Appellant imports from the parent company, the royalties relate to other services and intangibles such as information; whereas [2.2] Customs say the correct value of the goods includes the royalty payments. Effectively, that the nominated price of the goods between the Appellant as buyer and the parent company understates the true value. The roya...

3. Vaka v Accident Compensation Corporation (Personal Injury) [2024] NZACC 197 (2 December 2024) [pdf, 302 KB]

   ...[11] Following discharge, Mr Vaka returned to school but missed much of the 2017 academic school year due to ongoing symptoms with hospital admissions and medical appointment/tests. [12] On 15 August 2017, Dr Beard, GP, completed an Injury Claim form seeking cover for both concussion and diabetes insipidus because of the June 2016 head injury. [13] On 15 January 2018 the Corporation received a specialist opinion from Mr Jefferies, Paediatrician and Endocrinologist, who confir...

4. [2024] NZREADT 32 – JX v CAC2201 & Baker (13 September 2024) [pdf, 265 KB]

   ...[33] There are submissions from the purchaser (10 October 2023, 9 May, 24 July and 4 September 2024), the Authority (20 June 2024) and the licensee (4 June and 3 July 2024). The licensee provided a statement (29 August 2024) at the Tribunal’s request. JURISDICTION AND PRINCIPLES [34] This is an appeal pursuant to s 111 of the Act. [35] The appeal is by way of a rehearing.3 It proceeds on the basis of the evidence before the Committee, though leave can be granted to admit fre...

5. [2024] NZEmpC 212 Kavallaris v Inframax Construction Ltd [pdf, 295 KB]

   ...December 2023 Mr Kavallaris’ lawyer wrote to Inframax raising concerns of workplace stress, unfair disadvantage, and being subjected to unfair and unreasonable behaviour. The complaint primarily related to Ms Gribben. Mr Kavallaris requested that his concerns be investigated and that interim measures be put in place in the meantime. [8] Inframax’s board chair, Earl Rattray, was appointed as the decision maker of Mr Kavallaris’ complaint. He engaged a lawyer, Alast...

6. [2007] NZEmpC WC 8/07 Service and Food Workers Union Inc v OCS Ltd [pdf, 73 KB]

   ...OCS to work in hospitals in the Wellington region and who have worked on public holidays. [2] Those who had worked on Anzac Day and Queen’s Birthday in 2005 were paid the penal rates under the CEA for the hours they had worked. The union requested that in addition to these payments they be paid their usual weekly wage. The parties could not reach agreement and, after invoking a dispute, in September 2005 the union made application to the Employment Relations Authority to resol...

7. [2010] NZEmpC 156 Raukura Hauora o Tainui Trust v Nathan [pdf, 53 KB]

   ...that dealt with the misappropriation claim. There was no cross-challenge. The case raises the issue of whether an employer, in the event that misappropriation by an employee can be established, is able to recover the misappropriated funds in the form of damages pursuant to s 162 of the Employment Relations Act 2000 (the Act). The facts [4] The plaintiff is a Maori health provider providing health care services to all people within the boundaries of Tainui. In the South Aucklan...

8. [2011] NZEmpC 32 New Zealand Meat Workers Union of Aotearoa Inc v AFFCO NZ Ltd [pdf, 139 KB]

   ...preliminary issue to be resolved and that related to the correct interpretation and application of a particular provision in the collective agreement, i.e. cl 30 which was referred to throughout the hearing as the “seniority clause”. The union requested the Authority to remove this preliminary matter to the Court for determination pursuant to s 178 of the Act. AFFCO did not oppose the application. For its part, the Authority accepted that the interpretation of the seniority c...

9. [2012] NZEmpC 20 White & Others v Reserve Bank of New Zealand [pdf, 148 KB]

   ...plaintiffs had filed their application for removal. The Authority did, however, accept that the issues involved were complex and involved potential jurisdictional difficulties. [3] The plaintiffs, with the exception of Mr Ian Harrison, are all former employees of the defendant, who for convenience I shall refer to simply as “the Bank” or “the defendant”. Mr Harrison continues to be a Bank employee. All the plaintiffs were members of the Bank’s Staff Superannuation and...

10. [2013] NZEmpC 4 Dalley v Norrell Building Ltd [pdf, 106 KB]

    ...and Mr McIlroy the previous day. Later that day, Mr Norrell telephoned the site again and spoke to Mr McIlroy. Mr Norrell told Mr McIlroy that he wanted to speak with him and Mr Dalley at his home at 10 am the following day. At Mr Norrell’s request, Mr McIlroy passed that message on to Mr Dalley. [15] As the men on site had done at least 40 hours’ work that week, they were all entitled to have Friday off. Anticipating this, Mr Dalley had planned to do personal business tha...