Search Results

1. [2008] NZEmpC AC 14/08 Board of Trustees of Te Kura Kaupapa Motuhake O Tawhiuau v Edmonds [pdf, 80 KB]

   ...reasonable time and opportunity to provide an explanation; • an employer, before making a final decision, may need to make further inquiries to be satisfied of the facts of a matter causing concern; • an employee must be advised of the right to request representation at any stage; • where there is a requirement to advise of any corrective action, there be a reasonable opportunity to amend conduct; • if an allegation is sufficiently serious, an employee may be suspended...

2. Reid v Fire Services and Crown Law (Recall Application) [2012] NZHRRT 27 [pdf, 95 KB]

   ...Office for consideration. [7] On 18 February 2006, Mr Reid wrote to the New Zealand Fire Service requesting copies of all documents pertaining to its referral of the prospect of vexatious litigant proceedings to the Crown Law Office. [8] Both requests were treated as an information access request to which Principle 6 of the Privacy Act 1993 would apply and both the Crown Law Office and the New Zealand Fire Service resisted the requests, at least in respect of the vast majority of th...

3. Austell v Somerset LCRO 76 / 2009 (2 September 2009) [pdf, 113 KB]

   ...occurred, it failed to give him an opportunity to be heard on the nature of the sanctions imposed. Natural Justice: Notification of nature of allegation The original complaint was made to the Auckland District Law Society by lodgement of a “request for fee review “ form and “request for complaint investigation” form. It appears that that complaint was originally made shortly after 1 August 2008 when the Auckland District Law Society ceased to have jurisdiction to consider c...

4. Auckland Standards Committee 3 v PL [2016] NZLCDT 6 [pdf, 114 KB]

   ...betterment. Discovery [21] The Tribunal has been obliged to turn its attention to the discovery required in the WH Tribunal proceedings. There were many procedural orders issued by the WH Tribunal regarding failures on the part of the claimant and requests for supplementary disclosure. All of these were reported by the law firm to I. This Tribunal finds that I was aware of his obligation to disclose the Joint Venture. In the event he did not instruct any partner or member of s...

5. EA v ZZ LCRO 138/2011 and 124/2012 (24 January 2014) [pdf, 150 KB]

   ...that Mrs EC was still mistaken as to her ability to use [the bank account] especially as he [Mr ZZ] had pointed out to her in his initial letter, that the Power of Attorney had ceased to be of effect. Ownership of the vehicle: 8 The Lawyer has formed a view, based on a copy of [Mr FA]'s bank account which shows a payment of $4,000.00, which [Mr FA] made in November 2002. [Mr FA] has had the vehicle since that time and states that he has paid for it. The deceased's bank...

6. [2017] NZEnvC 181 Titirangi Protection Group Inc and Ors v Watercare Services Limited and Auckland Council [pdf, 10 MB]

   ...REASONS Introduction [1] This declaration addresses the scope of a so-called "legacy" designation (9324) contained within the Auckland Unitary Plan (which the parties agreed can be treated as operative for this declaration) and the former Waitakere District Plan (WSL4). The declaration relates to the extent that any new works relating to water supply on the site would be required to obtain either a resource consent or, more properly, a new designation. [2] The issue is...

7. Ratahi v Parininihi Ki Waitotara Incorporation - Section 53 Block IX Opunake SD being part Ngati Kahumate Block comprised in CT D4/240 (2007) 195 Aotea MB 127 (195 AOT 127) [pdf, 4.2 MB]

   ...February 2006. Mr Lawrence counsel for a number of respondents wrote to Mr Bulfin on 9 November 2005 raising the issue of jurisdiction but received no reply he says. The matter was set down for hearing on 24 February 2006 but was adjourned at the request of Mrs Hughes QC, counsel for the applicants in the instant case (the respondents in the substantive proceeding) who said she needed time to prepare and to brief rebuttal evidence. The substantive hearing occurred on 16 June 2006 wh...

8. LCRO 118/2018 VT v MQ (18 March 2020) [pdf, 157 KB]

   ...2015. Ms MQ had been paid $11,291.48, and had applied those funds to her invoices, leaving an unpaid balance of $10,102.93. [18] Ms MQ supplied a copy of the advice, and advice from counsel, Mr BJ, to enable Mr VT and Mr RH to brief Mr PY. Ms MQ requested payment of her outstanding fees before the file was uplifted. Further attempts to encourage Yelp to pay the outstanding balance came to naught, and in September 2016 Ms MQ’s firm commenced debt recovery proceedings in the Dist...

9. [2021] NZACC 191 - Smith v ACC (1 December 2021) [pdf, 201 KB]

   ...ongoing disability relating mainly to his neck. A vocational independence decision was issued in February 2012, however that decision was overturned at review in May 2013. [5] On 27 March 2017 the appellant’s GP lodged an ACC injury claim form for a right ankle sprain said to have occurred on 10 September 2010. The injury description noted: Was on rehab programme at gym. Was on wobble board and stepped off heavily with ankle giving way and severe pain. Treated by ph...

10. [2023] NZREADT 14 - CAC 2107 v Sheldon (13 June 2023) [pdf, 156 KB]

    ...property due to an unsatisfactory building report, Mr Sheldon: 1. Asked the prospective purchaser to say that the reason for the withdrawn offer was because of finance rather than an unsatisfactory building report. 2. Explained the reason for his request was because he would have to disclose the reason for the withdrawn offer to future potential buyers and that an offer withdrawn because of finance was less off-putting to such buyers than an offer withdrawn due to an unsatisfactory...