Search Results

1. Standards Committees v Deliu [2016] NZLCDT 41 [pdf, 441 KB]

   ...the decisions: (a) In LCDT 010/10, that the practitioner’s submission of lack of due process, with its outrageous allegations about the actions of those involved in the process, was not borne out by the facts – people were just doing their jobs;15 (b) In LCDT 008/12, that he did not recognise those involved were simply looking to ensure the fair administration of justice for everyone involved;16 (c) And further, allegations made about Justice Randerson conspiring with Jus...

2. [2017] NZEmpC 115 Schollum and Hastings v Corporate Consumables Ltd [pdf, 598 KB]

   ...at work and working, but is not at work and working. That provision merely ensures that the employee, enjoying a benefit bestowed upon him by the Holidays Act 1981, does not suffer thereby a reduction in another benefit, ie the income from the job. In [the employee’s] case, the income from the job continued, he chose not to enjoy the benefit bestowed on him by the Act and by his employment contract. Neither the Act nor the employment contract provide any further benefit to him....

3. Brooking v Henderson - Wharekahika A47 (2022) 110 Tairawhiti MB 238 (110 TRW 238) [pdf, 497 KB]

   ...depend on expensive outside contractors to carry out the work. [46] The respondent has done a lot of work on the whenua and has received little thanks for it. Under some duress, the respondent continues to save the trust money by doing these jobs himself. He considers that there has been improvement in the right direction. While no dividend has been paid, the witness considers that the question should be whether money is more important than the whenua gifted by the tīpuna. He...

4. [2024] NZEnvC 122 Grafton Downs Limited v Auckland Council [pdf, 2.5 MB]

   Grafton Downs Limited v Auckland Council IN THE ENVIRONMENT COURT AT AUCKLAND I TE KŌTI TAIAO O AOTEAROA KI TĀMAKI MAKAURAU Decision [2024] NZEnvC 122 IN THE MATTER OF an appeal under section 120 the Resource Management Act 1991 BETWEEN GRAFTON DOWNS LIMITED PHOENIX PROPERTY ADVISORY LIMITED (ENV-2023-AKL-000157) Appellant AND AUCKLAND COUNCIL Respondent Court: Environment Judge M J L Dickey sitting alone under s 279 of the Act Last case event: 1

5. OIA-124851.pdf [pdf, 13 MB]

   ...Y 2 14 Getting started with IT JET: https://jet.justice.govt.nz/how-do-i/search-for-pages-and-people-in-jet/ What is this? JET is the Ministry’s intranet. It is your first port of call for information, resources and news to help you do your job and stay connected with what’s happening in and around the Ministry. Handy searching tips People Finder: https://jet.justice.govt.nz/people-finder/ What is this? This is the directory for your colleague’s right across te Tāhū o te Tur...

6. [2011] NZEmpC 34 Martin v Northland Education Trust Inc [pdf, 219 KB]

   ...the Macbeth Sparknotes when this was raised again in cross-examination of her in this Court. [49] The absence of such materials from the resource cupboard accessible by teaching staff many months after it was known that Ms Martin had lost her job because she had used unauthorised teaching resources, not only does not cast doubt upon the reliability of her account but may well explain the veracity of both it and Mr Maden’s failure to find such resources there when he searched. I...

7. [2012] NZEmpC 101 Pottinger & Nine Dot consulting Ltd v Carew and Kelly Services (NZ) Ltd [pdf, 250 KB]

   ...[24] Ms Carew was initially a consultant with Kelly Services, and as such had a strong focus on developing client relationships. Her subsequent appointment as Business Development Manager carried more strategic responsibilities. According to the job description for this role, two of her primary objectives were to expand and enhance Kelly Services’ business relationship with local and national customers to contribute to enhanced sales performance, profitability, customer satisfacti...

8. [2009] NZEmpC AC 31/09 Ora Ltd v Kirkley [pdf, 80 KB]

   ...for them”. [16] Mrs Kirkley and Mr Lacey’s positions were then disestablished and reorganised as part of a new management structure. Mrs Kirkley was given a new position described as “Head of Corporate Services”. She did not receive a job description or any training for this role. Mrs Kirkley understood that her role involved additional responsibilities such as staff management, IT management, call- centre management, administration management, filing management, in addit...

9. [2009] NZEmpC AC 15/09 Air New Zealand Ltd v V [pdf, 95 KB]

   ...team before the test but had chosen not to do so. He was only prepared to involve himself in the rehabilitation programme after the plaintiff had discovered his issues. (v) The medical advice was that the defendant was not fit to return to his job and that there were no non-safety sensitive roles available or appropriate for the defendant. (vi) The defendant was not prepared to give up alcohol use despite the medical team’s statement that this would have to be a requirement....

10. [2009] NZEmpC AC 16A/09 Peterson & Anor v B Engineering Ltd & Anor [pdf, 87 KB]

    ...companies, they were in materially identical form, certainly as far as the express provisions alleged to have been breached that are the subject of this case are concerned. [48] I deal first with Jake Peterson’s. The summary of Jake Peterson’s job description was “Associate Product Designer/R&D”. The printed form of the agreement included the attached catch-all: “… and any other tasks as may be required by Management in the running of P&B Engineering Ltd, (P&a...