Search Results

1. QD v TS [2024] NZDT 124 (13 February 2024) [pdf, 191 KB]

   ...as part of his employment1, making the application before the Tribunal an employment matter. [3] Whereas the applicant founds his application in contract, the application cannot be determined on the terms of the contract alone. In employment matters the principles of contract and tort are only one consideration. The parties’ dispute is also governed by the relevant employment law. In particular before taking jurisdiction, the Tribunal must consider section s 161(1) of the Act2 whic...

2. HD & NC v WD [2023] NZDT 518 (25 October 2023) [pdf, 174 KB]

   ...Court [2023] NZDT 518 APPLICANT HD APPLICANT NC RESPONDENT WD APPLICANT'S INSURER X Ltd RESPONDENT INSURER Z Ltd The Tribunal orders: The claim is dismissed. Reason 1. This is a continuation of the matter having been adjourned in May 2023 for further evidence. 2. It is important to set out the history of how the claim came to be in the Tribunal because, while there is nothing unusual about the collision, there is an issue to be reso...

3. Griffiths v Accident Compensation Corporation (Late Filing Leave to appeal) [2023] NZACC 003 [pdf, 157 KB]

   ...scheme is minimising the economic, social and personal costs of the impact of injury on the community. Unnecessary delay in bringing an appeal to the ACC jurisdiction of the District Court carries potential costs for the appellant and also for the justice system and those involved in it. [6] In Avery v No 2 Public Service Appeal Board,1 Richmond J (for the Court of Appeal) stated: When once an appellant allows the time for appealing to go by then his position suffers a radical ch...

4. [2022] NZACC 201 — Giddy v ACC (18 October 2022) [pdf, 170 KB]

   ...without opposition from the respondent. 1 Almond v Read [2017] NZSC 80, [2017] 1 NZLR 801, (2017) 23 PRNZ 533. 3 [38] The ultimate question when considering the exercise of the discretion to extend time under r 29A is what the interests of justice require. That necessitates an assessment of the particular circumstances of the case. Factors which are likely to require consideration include: (a) The length of the delay. Clearly, the time period between the expiry of the appe...

5. [2022] NZACC 141 – Child Rescue Charitable Trust v ACC (21 July 2022) [pdf, 169 KB]

   ...with the result that an extension of time should generally be granted, desirably without opposition from the respondent. [38] The ultimate question when considering the exercise of the discretion to extend time under r 29A is what the interests of justice require. That necessitates an assessment of the particular circumstances of the case. Factors which are likely to require consideration include: (a) The length of the delay. Clearly, the time period between the expiry of the appe...

6. AQ & BQ v DD Ltd [2022] NZDT 4 (11 February 2022) [pdf, 96 KB]

   ...Actual costs could be higher, or lower than these assessments. However, I can only base my decision on the evidence presented, and regardless of how actual costs pan out, in the context of this dispute, and having regard to the substantial merits and justice of the dispute (s18(6)), it is reasonable to look at both positions in the round and treat each claim as a full set off to the other. CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 3 of 4 Referee: J Robertshawe Date: 1...

7. AM v K Ltd [2024] NZDT 138 (21 March 2024) [pdf, 204 KB]

   ...city]. 3. The issue for determination is whether K Ltd has breached its contract with AM and if so whether it should pay AM compensation for his extra costs. Did K Ltd breach its contract with AM? 4. AM explained at the two hearing of this matter that his original flight from [International city] was cancelled and that when he tried to check-in the next day on the rescheduled flight, he was not allowed to board because his transit visa to [Country 2] was not valid and his [Countr...

8. MU v QT Ltd [2024] NZDT 210 (4 March 2024) [pdf, 104 KB]

   ...claim. 4. QT Ltd did not appear at the hearing or provide any defence to the claim. The absence of a party does not prevent the claim going ahead. QT Ltd’ email to MU dated 23 June 2023 has been considered in making my decision. 5. The matter had been set down for hearing in December 2023 and was adjourned at the request of KU, director of QT Ltd, on the basis that he said QT Ltd had not received the claim. KU advised QT Ltd was going to counter claim and the matter was resc...

9. XN v C Ltd [2023] NZDT 273 (20 June 2023) [pdf, 198 KB]

   ...of the Tribunal. Specifically, the Referee conducted the proceedings (or a Tribunal investigator carried out an enquiry) in a way that was unfair and prejudiced the result of the proceedings. This means you consider there was a breach of natural justice, as a result of procedural unfairness that affected the result of the proceedings. PLEASE NOTE: Parties need to be aware they cannot appeal a Referee’s finding of fact. Where a Referee has made a decision on the issues raised as part...

10. Smith v Accident Compensation Corporation (Work-related gradual-process injury, late filing) [2024] NZACC 32 [pdf, 152 KB]

    ...scheme is minimising the economic, social and personal costs of the impact of injury on the community. Unnecessary delay in bringing an appeal to the ACC jurisdiction of the District Court carries potential costs for the appellant and also for the justice system and those involved in it. [6] In Avery v No 2 Public Service Appeal Board,1 Richmond J (for the Court of Appeal) stated: 1 Avery v No 2 Public Service Appeal Board [1973] 2 NZLR 86, 91. 3 When once an appellant al...