Search Results

1. Powerpoint NZLS Workshop - HOW TO RUN A RESOURCE MANAGEMENT CASE [pdf, 815 KB]

   ...Raise any concern through the Chair – Watch issue of predetermination / bias at local level – Do not interrupt other parties cases – Do not antagonise panel – Note ability to lodge late submissions • Hearing Preparation – Our real job starts once hearing is fixed and timetable set – The more complex the more thought needs to go into presentation – Discussions with Council staff – Evidence, officers reports, application, AEE mostly pre-read – So your role is to m...

2. McLeod v Nga Uri a Maata Ngapo - Charitable Trust Harataunga West 2B2A1 Block [2017] Chief Judge's MB 46 (2017 CJ 46) [pdf, 474 KB]

   ...that although 27 people attended the meeting, only eight were landowners, despite there being 68 owners in the land at that time. Further, the resolution made at the hui, that “the committee of “Ngā Uri ā Maata Ngāpo” Be vested with the job of establishing a papakainga/pā on the land”, was passed via two shareholder votes and four proxy votes, with one shareholder abstaining and another voting against. [13] Drawing on these facts, the applicant submits that the support f...

3. [2018] NZEmpC 84 GSTech Ltd v A Labour Inspector of the MBIE [pdf, 285 KB]

   ...relevant parts of the Authority’s determination to put this finding in context: [51] Mr Sharma’s evidence is that, as part of Mr Kumar’s work for GSTL, he was asked to do some limited business development work, as provided for under his Job Description, and agreed to do so. The work entailed some sales duties which were undertaken under a contract entered into between GSTL and Connecting. Mr Kumar, as he acknowledged, remained employed by GSTL while he did the Connecting w...

4. [2020] NZEmpC 181 Evans v JNJ Management Ltd [pdf, 207 KB]

   ...properly with Mr Evans and keep him informed of the changing structure of the security services took him by surprise and left him frustrated and unhappy, particularly as he was left to inform the proposed new staff member that they did not have a job after all. He was disadvantaged by JNJ’s actions, and felt humiliated, felt a loss of dignity and suffered injury to his feelings. [42] He also was unhappy and hurt that he was not offered a meeting to discuss his concerns. [43]...

5. E v T [2021] NZDT 1310 (28 January 2021) [pdf, 226 KB]

   ...($13,012.80) for the following reasons: (a) It is established that the System was not working, right from settlement date. It is common ground that the System had been incorrectly installed by a subcontractor who, as Mr T puts it, was “not up to the job”. (b) The main defects involved: (i) The radiators switching on and heating the property when the thermostat is off; (ii) The radiators leaking, causing pressure in the System to unexpectedly drop and shut the System off...

6. LCRO 197/2016 BC v RN (23 May 2017) [pdf, 99 KB]

   ...basis that the Committee did not give sufficient consideration to her version of events. She relies on the fact that her new lawyer concluded matters within a fortnight of her terminating Mr RN’s retainer as the basis for saying he did a poor job. Ms BC maintains Mr RN lacked competence, misunderstood her instructions, caused delays by insisting her daughter come to New Zealand, and was discourteous to her based on his tone of voice and “short arrogant comments”. She conten...

7. [2021] NZACC 2 - Judkins v ACC (5 January 2021) [pdf, 183 KB]

   ...great part by genetic influence, and that environmental factors were not primarily exercised though physical loading exposures. Dr Monigatti referred to twin studies and the majority medical view that lumbar spondylosis occurred regardless of what jobs people did and whether they worked at all. Dr Monigatti assessed that the contribution from Mr Judkins’ work process to his degenerative lumbar spinal disease “would be less than 10% and probably less than 5%”. [28] Dr Monig...

8. Finlay v Baker [pdf, 42 KB]

   ...applied for on 2 June 1998 shows Mr Finlay as owner, contact person and builder. The consent was issued to Mr Finlay in those capacities. 6 20. It appears that the claimant carried out some negotiations as one builder appears to have priced the job on the basis that he would get a management fee. This proposition was rejected. 21. On 24 July 1998 Lajak wrote to the applicant:- Dear Ken We have for acknowledgement your submitted price for labour only contract for units one...

9. [2020] NZEmpC 111 Cooper v Phoenix Publishing Ltd [pdf, 218 KB]

   ...appropriate sanction and that is consistent with the submission made by Mr Ogilvie this morning. 5 Cooper v Phoenix Publishing Ltd (No 2) [2020] NZEmpC 11. 6 Peter Reynolds Mechanical Ltd t/a The Italian Job Service Centre v Denyer (Labour Inspector) [2016] NZCA 464; [2017] 2 NZLR 451; [2016] ERNZ 828. [17] In Peter Reynolds v Labour Inspector the Court of Appeal indicated a range of factors will be relevant in assessing the...

10. Te Manutukutuku Issue 3 [pdf, 2.9 MB]

    ...that that experience will serve me well in my work with the Tribunal. After all, human resource management involves dealing with people and in my very short time with the Tri­ bunal, I have already found that one of the pleasing ele­ ments to the job is the amount of people involvement. While this year is a significant one because it marks the 150th anniversary of the signing of the Treaty of Waitangi, it also marks the Tribunal's 15th birthday. The Tribunal came into being as a r...