Search Results

1. Karaitiana-Bryant v Karaitiana - Waipahihi 4H [2024] Chief Judge's MB 278 (2024 CJ 278) [pdf, 300 KB]

   ...eight names of the transferees. Everyone in Court should have heard the list. That fact alone would normally be sufficient for me to find that there was no mistake or omission made by the Court. When coupled with the failure to sign the requisite forms before Court accepting the shares, and the fact that Erimana or Irimana did nothing about the matter, the outcome is consistent with the decision. [23] However, a technical mistake was made. Moari intended only part of his shares to...

2. [2024] NZEmpC 4 Bread of Life Christian Church in Auckland v Chen [pdf, 221 KB]

   ...September 2019. However, the plaintiff denies it was involved in this agreement, the implication being that the contractual relationship was between Mr Chen and the Church, not Mr Chen and the Trust. The plaintiff says the Trust paid Mr Chen at the request of the Church. [12] The plaintiff also says that was a fixed term arrangement which ended on 31 March 2022 and the Trust therefore stopped paying Mr Chen at that time.3 [13] Mr Chen says he was unjustifiably dismissed. [14] T...

3. Central Standards Committee 3 v Bailey [2023] NZLCDT 53 (5 December 2023) [pdf, 191 KB]

   ...restricted to limited circumstances. The rules permit acting for more than one client in a matter only where the risk (that the lawyer may be unable to discharge the obligations owed to one or more of the clients) is negligible, and where the informed consent of all parties is obtained. The threshold above which the prohibition in rule 6.1 applies is “a more than negligible risk”. That threshold is very low2. In most cases where there is a risk of conflict, the lawyer must not a...

4. Zhang v Samsung Electronics New Zealand Ltd (Strike Out Application) [2023] NZHRRT 42 [pdf, 175 KB]

   ...and include race,7 and ethnic or national origins.8 [23] Mr Zhang does not need to establish that Samsung NZ intended to treat him less favourably under s 44(1)(b) on any of these prohibited grounds, or even that one of the prohibited grounds formed the predominant reason for his less favourable treatment. 4 Attorney-General v Prince [1998] 1 NZLR 262 (CA) at 267; and Couch v Attorney-General [2008] NZSC 45, [2008] 3 NZLR 725 at [33]. 5 Parohinog v Yellow Pages Group Ltd [2015]...

5. 2023-09-26-Evidence-of-Siiri-Wilkening-Noise.PDF [PDF, 255 KB]

   ...houses that receive external noise levels above 64 dB LAeq(24h) (Category C for new roads) and, for this Project, also for houses that receiver external noise levels from 58 to 64 dB LAeq(24h) (Category B for new roads). [20] In support of this request, Ms Prouse provided an acoustic report from Jepsen Acoustics. This report sets out sound insulation measurements undertaken in August 2023 on the Prouse homestead. The survey results suggest a very low noise reduction performance b...

6. Waikato Bay of Plenty Standards Committee 1 v H [2013] NZLCDT 7 (18 March 2013) [pdf, 222 KB]

   ...the Vendor on the sale of the Property to the Complainant. The Practitioner arranged for a legal executive within the firm to carry out the conveyancing work for the Vendor on the sale. 7 An agreement for sale and purchase of the Property, in the form approved by the Real Estate Institute of New Zealand and the Auckland District Law Society (7th edition, July 1999), was prepared by the Practitioner and signed by the Vendor and Complainant, dated 3 May 2000 (Agreement). 8 The Agreement...

7. [2024] NZEmpC 109 LDJ v EZC [pdf, 249 KB]

   ...or defence brought in the alternative. This can be illustrated by the Oxford English Dictionary’s primary definition of “incidental”: “Occurring or liable to occur in fortuitous or subordinate conjunction with something else of which it forms no essential part”; thus the question must relate to some essential part of the pleadings for it to be not incidental.5 [12] It is not necessary for the applicant to prove that the question of law will fall for determination in the c...

8. Peta v Hemara - Succession to Henry Peta [2023] Chief Judge's MB 731 (2023 CJ 731) [pdf, 335 KB]

   ...2021 Chief Judge’s MB 788-804 (2021 CJ 788-804). 12 2021 CJ 788-804, above n 11. 2023 Chief Judge's MB 740 [9] This file was not referred to me for my decision with the minutes and submissions until 3 October 2023, despite repeated requests for the file from my office. There is absolutely no excuse for this extended period of delay, and I apologise to all parties on behalf of the Court. Ngā Ture The Law [10] The Chief Judge’s jurisdiction to amend or cancel an...

9. [2023] NZEmpC 164 F & B Remuera Ltd v A Labour Inspector [pdf, 269 KB]

   ...alternative. [5] The plaintiff has applied for a stay of execution of the Authority’s determination and has also applied for an interim non-publication order. [6] I consider each application in turn. 1 A Labour Inspector v BRAK Burns Ltd (formerly Burgered Restaurants Auckland Ltd) [2023] NZERA 19 (Member Arthur). 2 At [27](i). 3 At [27](ii). 4 A Labour Inspector v BRAK Burns Ltd (formerly Burgered Restaurants Auckland Ltd) [2023] NZERA 30 (Member Arthur). 5 A...

10. [2024] NZEnvC 294 Whakatane District Council v Ohope International Golf Club Incorporated [pdf, 1.6 MB]

    ...trees attracts birds, which introduce and move seeds. These trees also provide a more sheltered microclimate in which a greater diversity of species can establish. The process of succession typically expands outward from individual ‘pioneer’ trees, forming a patchy, ‘clumped’ distribution of woody vegetation (as is the case with the groupings of woody vegetation within the impacted area). 3. MANAGEMENT ACTIONS While it is anticipated that natural replacement of the trees that ha...