Search Results

1. Cambie v ACC [2012] NZACA 7 [pdf, 72 KB]

   ...Cambie. [15] Although it does not affect my consideration of the merits of the appeal, the probability that the Corporation applied the wrong legislation to Bridget’s claim in my view, mitigates in her favour in so far as the overall interests of justice are concerned. Affidavit Evidence [16] Ms Cambie swore an affidavit to explain the relevant history leading up to the filing of the leave application, and Mr Miller, as principal in the law firm representing the appellant, also...

2. VT Ltd v BN [2020] NZDT 1535 (30 April 2020) [pdf, 131 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...

3. AB v CD LCRO 228/2014 (27 October 2016) [pdf, 343 KB]

   ...determination, thus making the process void ab initio. (j) The legal standards officer who had managed the file, had acted improperly. (k) Mr EF should have been debarred from representing Ms CD. (l) It was wrong for the Committee to refer some matters to the Disciplinary Tribunal and at the same time determine other matters. [16] Ms CD’s counsel was invited to comment on Mr AB’s review application. In submissions filed with the Legal Complaints Review Officer (LCRO) on 17...

4. [2011] NZEmpC 54 Madden v Worldxchange Communications Ltd [pdf, 55 KB]

   ...[5] Subsequently Mr Maddern filed a 20 page memorandum (with attachments) setting out his comprehensive submissions on the issue of costs in this Court and in the Authority. I am now in a position, therefore, to deal with both of the outstanding matters relating to costs. 2 At [55]. 3 AA 212A/10, 15 October 2010. [6] The thrust of Mr Maddern’s submissions in relation to the costs award in the Authority appears to be that no...

5. National and Auckland Standards Committees v Orlov [2015] NZLCDT 16 [pdf, 129 KB]

   ...resisting a stay of the proceedings. It was only Mr Orlov’s last minute offer as to removal from the Roll that moved the Tribunal to grant the stay. That is correct. Mr Hodge submits that the deed of settlement, although purporting to settle matters of costs at its paragraph 3.3, does not purport to tie the Tribunal’s hands in respect of the costs of this stay application. [14] However the New Zealand Law Society would not seek to recover any costs ordered against Mr Orlov ei...

6. [2019] NZEmpC 90 Armstrong v Surplus Brokers Ltd [pdf, 281 KB]

   JOHN NEIL ARMSTRONG v SURPLUS BROKERS LIMITED [2019] NZEmpC 90 [31 July 2019] IN THE EMPLOYMENT COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND I TE KŌTI TAKE MAHI O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU [2019] NZEmpC 90 EMPC 184/2019 IN THE MATTER OF an application for leave to extend time to file a challenge to a determination of the Employment Relations Authority BETWEEN JOHN NEIL ARMSTRONG Applicant AND SURPLUS BROKERS LIMITED Respondent Hearin...

7. [2018] NZEmpC 109 A Labour Inspector v Daleson Investment Ltd [pdf, 201 KB]

   ...appropriately arrived at based on the material before it. That means that information and evidence which was not before the Authority, and which it accordingly did not take into account, are not relevant. I have not overlooked the broader interests of justice which might otherwise arise. They are, however, outweighed in my view. I do not consider that it would be appropriate, including having regard to the relevant statutory framework for challenges, to broaden the natur...

8. [2022] NZEmpC 69 Alkazaz v Enterprise IT Ltd [pdf, 181 KB]

   AHMED ALKAZAZ v ENTERPRISE IT LIMITED [2022] NZEmpC 69 [22 April 2022] IN THE EMPLOYMENT COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND I TE KŌTI TAKE MAHI O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU [2022] NZEmpC 69 EMPC 397/2019 IN THE MATTER OF a challenge to a determination of the Employment Relations Authority AND IN THE MATTER OF an application for costs BETWEEN AHMED ALKAZAZ Plaintiff AND ENTERPRISE IT LIMITED Defendant Hearing: On the papers Appearance...

9. LQ v PO Ltd [2019] NZDT 1435 (15 March 2019) [pdf, 99 KB]

   ...matter and decided not to all any evidence or actively prosecute the matter. It is not clear why the Investigator took this action. 7. LQ claims $2500.00 as described above. PO Ltd objects to the hearing of a new claim on the basis that all matters have been heard already and two complaints to the EWRB on this matter have been quashed. It put forward the view that LQ is a vexatious litigant but no claim for costs was made. 8. The issue to determine is: • Is the question of...

10. [2022] NZEmpC 215 Drivesure Ltd v McQuillan [pdf, 154 KB]

    ...appropriate. (d) There is no basis for the $600 claimed for witness expenses. [10] It also opposes the proposed uplift for GST. [11] The basis for the 33 per cent proposed reduction revolves largely around alleged irrelevant ancillary matters addressed in evidence in the Court. The Court has discretion on costs [12] The Court may order any party to pay any other party such costs as the Court thinks reasonable.3 It will exercise its discretion on a principled basis an...