Search Results

1. [2022] NZACC 185 — Razek v ACC (27 September 2022) [pdf, 186 KB]

   ...[31] He accepts therefore that regrettably part of the 4 May 2021 decision is wrong. [32] He says however that ACC has significant issues with the evidence presented by Mr Razek in respect of the quantity and value of shoes and socks that he has requested. [33] Mr Marten also submits that there are several discretionary layers within the social rehabilitation provisions of the Act. As such, if the Court agrees that the shoes and socks constitute a social rehabilitation aid, the app...

2. [2022] NZEnvC 201 Dunedin International Airport Limited v Dunedin City Council [pdf, 640 KB]

   ...relevant requirements and 1 Affidavit of P B Rawson affirmed 14 September 2022 at [22], [37] and [44]-[45]. 3 objectives of the Act including, in particular, Part 2. Outcome [6] All parties to the proceeding have executed the memorandum requesting the orders. On the information provided to the court, I am satisfied that the orders will promote the purpose of the Act so I will make the orders sought. ______________________________ P A Steven Environment Judge...

3. 2022 NZPSPLA 23.pdf [pdf, 152 KB]

   ...investigation DM raised several alleged breaches of the Privacy Act, Official Information Act or Employment Relations Act. ST considered these to be matters of a personal grievance and more appropriately addressed by DM to his employer rather than forming part of the investigation. [31] ST and DM have different views on the extent of the issues included in the scope of the employment investigation. To decide whose opinion is correct would most likely require me to review the complai...

4. Interpreter’s Code of Conduct [pdf, 211 KB]

   ...affidavit is submitted to defence counsel for a defendant or defence witness and officer in charge/prosecutor for a prosecution witness. If the participant discloses information about the case to the interpreter during a trial, the interpreter should request to speak to the judge in private and tell them what they have heard. Information is not to be used for personal gain An interpreter must not take advantage of knowledge obtained when acting as an interpreter or through acc...

5. 2023 NZPSPLA 011.pdf [pdf, 120 KB]

   ...to roster him to roles that required a COA. In addition, Watchmen Security continued to employ Mr Awa when they knew his application for a COA had been declined. [6] CIPU noted that Mr Hunt and Watchmen did not provide them with the records requested to show the period during which Mr Awa was engaged or confirmation that other guards they employed all had COAs. [7] Before the hearing I sent CIPU’s investigation report to Mr Hunt and set a timetable for Mr Hunt and Watchmen S...

6. [2022] NZACC 53 - Stewart v ACC (4 April 2022) [pdf, 163 KB]

   ...review hearing 4/5/2020. 3. ACC's non-adherence to the first time extension. 4. ACC's non-adherence to the second time extension. 5. Even if ACC attend tomorrow's review they have not: a) Sent me a copy of the claim file as requested back in March. b) Have made no contact with Mr Stewart re the case conference nor the review hearing or the subsequent time extensions. [14] On 6 July 2020, the Reviewer dismissed the review in respect of the Corporation’s deci...

7. [2022] NZEmpC 126 Henderson Travels Ltd v Kaur [pdf, 194 KB]

   ...the position of a plaintiff because she did not challenge the determination or file a counterclaim. She did, however, raise positive defences and seeks an uplift in the remedies awarded to her by the Authority in two respects. One of them is a request to increase the compensation awarded to her under s 123(1)(c)(i) and the other is for enhanced penalties. [24] The company’s challenge means the Court is required to hear the whole matter again and to reach its own conclusions....

8. 2022-NZPSPLA-023 [pdf, 152 KB]

   ...investigation DM raised several alleged breaches of the Privacy Act, Official Information Act or Employment Relations Act. ST considered these to be matters of a personal grievance and more appropriately addressed by DM to his employer rather than forming part of the investigation. [31] ST and DM have different views on the extent of the issues included in the scope of the employment investigation. To decide whose opinion is correct would most likely require me to review the complai...

9. [2022] NZEmpC 135 Singh v Dhaliwal [pdf, 220 KB]

   ...Singh and $2,000 is to be paid to the Crown. [33] The defendants should view these orders seriously and discharge their obligations in full and without delay. Failure to do so may well result in a further application for sanctions, in whatever form is necessary. Costs [34] Mr Singh is entitled to costs. Mr Dhaliwal and VEL are jointly and severally liable for these in the sum of $1,000, which should be paid within 28 days. B A Corkill Judge Judgment signed at 11...

10. LCRO 4/2021 RQ v WJ (9 February 2022) [pdf, 161 KB]

    ...with Mr FG’s response to his letter of 24 June 2019, in which Mr FG advised that Mr RQ’s complaints could only be addressed by way of a formal complaint to the Lawyers Complaints Service. [11] Mr RQ is aware of earlier decisions5 in which I formed the view that complaints about the Complaints Service and members of Standards Committees should be referred to the Board of the New Zealand Law Society. As noted above, Mr RQ has received legal advice in this regard supporting that...