Search Results

1. [2020] NZIACDT 32 - BV v Aiolupotea (27 July 2020) [pdf, 207 KB]

   ...March 2018. A visitor visa was then granted by Immigration New Zealand to the complainant on 23 March 2018, due to expire on 6 June 2018. [10] The complainant was advised by Mr Aiolupotea to leave New Zealand before the visa expired and to wait offshore for the outcome of the citizenship application. However, the complainant, who says he was not advised by Mr Aiolupotea of the expiry date of the visa, remained unlawfully in New Zealand after its expiry. [11] On 5 September 2018,...

2. Singh v Devi [2011] NZIACDT 22 (7 July 2011) [pdf, 103 KB]

   ...director of the Fiji practice in May 2009, the former staff member accused of theft took over and did things the Adviser would not condone, and should not be responsible for. General comments: [10.14] When the Complainant first lodged her application, offshore advisers could operate without being licensed. [10.15] The Adviser’s New Zealand licence “should not be impeached” on the basis of what was occurring in Fiji. [10.16] The Adviser was not licensed at the time. [10.17] T...

3. [2019] NZCAA 1 (18 January 2019) [pdf, 216 KB]

   ...the online report regarding the odometer from the New Zealand website. It claimed that Customs’ position was implausible. [11.2] New Zealand officials could not provide the information required regarding the process to check odometers for offshore vehicles. [11.3] The appellant could not obtain the information regarding the vehicle from the New Zealand database that Customs used. [11.4] The appellant reiterated the financial effect of the forfeiture, and said that in additio...

4. [2022] NZEmpC 134 CultureSafe NZ Ltd v Employment Relations Authority [pdf, 211 KB]

   ...efficient and effective administration of justice.6 [21] Here, CultureSafe has not looked after the grievants. The Authority records that they are visa-dependent workers for whom English is a second language and that one of them is currently offshore. As the Authority notes, their personal circumstances 5 Employment Relations Act 2000, s 236. 6 Ward v Concrete Structures (NZ) Ltd [2019] NZEmpC 111 at [12]. may put them in a category of employees who are inherently vu...

5. [2022] NZEmpC 190 Te Whatu Ora – Health New Zealand v Culturesafe NZ Ltd (in liq) [pdf, 252 KB]

   ...directions which are the subject of the proceeding; he says that it lacked jurisdiction to take such steps. 36 Sibly v Christchurch City Council [2002] 1 ERNZ 476 (EmpC). 37 Abernethy v Dynea New Zealand Ltd (No 1) [2007] ERNZ 271 (EmpC); Udovenko v Offshore Marine Services (New Zealand) Ltd [2013] NZEmpC 174. 38 Bay of Plenty District Health Board v Culturesafe New Zealand Ltd , above n 11. [42] That, however, is not the point when a protest to jurisdiction is to be c...

6. [2023] NZIACDT 27 BT v Li (2 November 2023) [pdf, 209 KB]

   ...at two addresses (though with a joint tenancy at the second) but by August 2021, there was solid evidence that they had been living in the second address for 12 months. She gave the client the option to leave New Zealand and apply for a visa offshore. In the future, she would make sure clients confirmed their awareness of the risks by email. (3) After the first s 61 request was declined, she offered to do the second for $800. A new agreement was not signed since the second requ...

7. [2021] NZEnvC 140 Protect Aotea v Auckland Council [pdf, 545 KB]

   ...on appeal can undertake any competing assessment of those matters. b) POAL’s marine dumping consent forms part of the existing environment and the dredging consents sought by POAL may not be refused on the ground that there should be no offshore dumping. REASONS Introduction These two appeals are against a decision of independent hearing commissioners appointed by the Auckland Council (the Council) granting two resource consents to Ports of Auckland Limited (POAL). One...

8. Anti-corruption guide for NZ businesses [pdf, 223 KB]

   ...http://www.doingbusinesswithoutbribery.com/newzealand.html� (vi) Due Diligence • Organisations must undertake appropriate due diligence on third parties There is compelling evidence that third parties are frequently used to conceal bribe payments, particularly in offshore transactions. 15 This includes agents and other intermediaries, consultants, representatives, distributors, contractors, suppliers and joint venture partners, whether individuals or companies. Due diligenc...

9. [2024] NZEmpC 91 (Judgment (No 6) of Judge M S King 28 May 2024) [pdf, 323 KB]

   ...Ltd v Gatx-Fuller Australasia Pty Ltd [1985] 2 NZLR 11 (HC) at 21 – 22. 6 Dotcom v Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp [2014] NZCA 509, (2014) 110 IPR 442 at [18]; Hannay v Mount [2011] NZCA 530 at [20] – [22]; Wing Hung Printing Co Ltd v Saito Offshore Pty Ltd [2010] NZCA 502, [2011] 1 NZLR 754 at [37]-[42]. 7 Ninemia Maritime corp v Trave Schiffahrtsgesellschaft mbH “The Niedersachsen” [1983] 1 WLR 1412 (CA) at 1417. (a) FRD has misappropriated STU’s stock during...

10. 2017NZSSAA 006 (9 March 2017) [pdf, 115 KB]

    ...suitable for single-handed sailing back to New Zealand. The appellant was close to giving up on the endeavour but did ultimately, after a significant delay, find a suitable vessel. There were then unexpected problems with fitting out the vessel to offshore standards. One of those difficulties was that he had to change the registration of the vessel, and could not do so without meeting some survey requirements. That became very problematic because the only place where the work...