Search Results

1. [2021] NZREADT 8 - Complaints Assessment Committee 2001 v Sheldon (19 February 2021) [pdf, 198 KB]

   ...be found guilty of misconduct is made on the basis of more than one breach of a Rule or a provision of the Act, are not necessarily comparable or helpful. [63] Both counsel referred in submissions to the Tribunal’s decision in Mabruk. The judgment in Commerce Commission v Whitehead was adopted by the Tribunal in its decision in Mabruk, in which the Tribunal upheld a Complaints Assessment Committee’s finding of unsatisfactory conduct.13 The licensee, Mr Mabruk, had advertised...

2. Macdonald v Accident Compensation Corporation (Further ruling on application to recall judgment) [2024] NZACC 29 [pdf, 236 KB]

   ...Hearing: On the papers Appearances: Ms K Koloni, advocate for the Applicant Mr P McBride, counsel for the Respondent Date of Ruling: 16 February 2024 _____________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT OF JUDGE C J MCGUIRE [FURTHER RULING ON APPLICATION TO RECALL JUDGMENT] _____________________________________________________________________ [1] In my ruling in this matter dated 12 January 2024, I said the following: 1. In my minu...

3. [2016] NZEmpC 135 Nathan v Broadspectrum [pdf, 180 KB]

   ...LIMITED (FORMERLY TRANSFIELD SERVICES (NEW ZEALAND) LIMITED) Defendant Hearing: 19 May 2016 (heard at Wellington) Appearances: T Cleary, counsel for the plaintiff J Upton QC and R Upton, counsel for the defendant Judgment: 28 October 2016 JUDGMENT OF JUDGE K G SMITH Introduction [1] This case is a non de novo challenge to a determination of the Employment Relations Authority (the Authority) dated 11 December 2015, 1 in which Mr Jason...

4. LCRO 207/2015 CA v BE (21 August 2018) [pdf, 205 KB]

   ...of professional conduct, were that Mr BE had: (a) failed to treat third parties with integrity, respect and courtesy (r 12); (b) failed to use legal processes only for proper purposes (r 2.3); and (c) failed to exercise independent professional judgment on a client’s behalf (r 5.3) [12] The Committee delivered its decision on 7 September 2015 and determined, pursuant to s 138(2) of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 (the Act), that no further action on the complaint was neces...

5. Rapatini v Accident Compensation Corporation (Personal injury Deemed Decision) [pdf, 220 KB]

   ...RAPATINI Appellant AND ACCIDENT COMPENSATION CORPORATION Respondent Hearing: 29 March 2023 Held at: Wellington/Te Whanganui-a-Tara by AVL Appearances: The Appellant is self-represented H Ifwersen for the Respondent Judgment: 6 April 2023 RESERVED JUDGMENT OF JUDGE P R SPILLER [Claim for personal injury - s 26, deemed decision – s 58, Accident Compensation Act 2001 (“the Act”)] Introduction [1] This is an appeal from the decision of a Review...

6. [2017] NZEmpC 78 Chief Executive of the Department of Corrections v CANZ Inc [pdf, 191 KB]

   ...CORRECTIONS ASSOCIATION OF NEW ZEALAND INC Defendant Hearing: 21-22 November 2016 (Heard at Wellington) Appearances: P Churchman QC and K Radich, counsel for plaintiff J Roberts and J Sharman, counsel for defendant Judgment: 21 June 2017 JUDGMENT OF JUDGE K G SMITH [1] In July 2015 the Chief Executive of the Department of Corrections restructured staff positions in prisons under his management. One result of this restructuring was that p...

7. Performance Improvement Framework (PIF) July 2014 - follow-up [pdf, 195 KB]

   ...resolve a case is the right one, across criminal and civil jurisdic ons, meliness needs to be seen as part of a balanced focus on all of the elements of quality jus ce: equality and cost of access, meliness, predictability and the accuracy of judgement. Jus ce delayed, is jus ce denied and mely resolu on can be important to reducing ongoing harm. However, at some stage these other quality factors will need to be given more weight. We were struck, for example, by the variability i...

8. LCRO 136/2021 YL v OB (28 February 2022) [pdf, 249 KB]

   ...[26] In reaching that decision the Committee concluded that: (a) whilst Mr OB could have “perhaps progressed matters more speedily”, it did not consider that Mr OB had been responsible for undue delay; and (b) whilst Mr OB had made an error of judgement in discussing intimate material with Ms YL over the phone in circumstances where Ms YL had been the subject of alleged sexual abuse, the error did not merit a disciplinary response. 8 Application for review [27] Ms YL fil...

9. Taylor v Corrections (No. 2) [2018] NZHRRT 43 [pdf, 323 KB]

   ...Title, is to provide better protection of human rights in New Zealand. That purpose must not be overlooked when assessing whether the evidence will assist the Tribunal to deal effectively with the matter before it. As both this provision and the judgment in Carlyon Holdings Ltd v Proceedings Commissioner at 533 recognise, a technical approach by the Tribunal to evidentiary matters is inappropriate. [51] ... Section 106(1)(d) of the HRA is not a secondary or fall-back provision which co...

10. [2013] NZEmpC 56 Hamon v Coromandel Independent Living Trust [pdf, 132 KB]

    ...December 2012, by the defendant on 13 August 2012 and by the Chief Mediator (granted leave to appear and be represented) on 30 November 2012 Counsel: Lucy Hamon, plaintiff in person Robert Coltman and Myriam Mitchell, counsel for defendant Judgment: 10 April 2013 INTERLOCUTORY JUDGMENT OF JUDGE B S TRAVIS [1] The plaintiff has applied for leave to waive mediation confidentiality on the grounds that an alleged blackmail threat is an exception to mediation confidentia...