Search Results

1. Brown v Progressive Enterprises Ltd (Strike-Out) [2024] NZHRRT 10 [pdf, 207 KB]

   ...identifiable prohibited ground of discrimination is pleaded or disclosed in Mr Brown’s claim. Therefore, the allegations in the claim do not constitute discrimination in breach of s 44 (that prohibits discrimination in the provision of goods and services) or of s 65 (that prohibits indirect discrimination). [8.2] Mr Brown has not pleaded any facts that give rise to a reasonably arguable case that the PEL employees’ comments constitute “less favourable treatment” and that...

2. ENVC combined interested party notices R to Y [pdf, 12 MB]

   IN THE ENVIRONMENT COURT ENV-2013-AKL-000174 AT AUCKLAND IN THE MATTER of the Resource Management Act 1991 (Act) IN THE MATTER an application under section 87G of the Act BETWEEN WAIHEKE MARINAS LIMITED Applicant AND AUCKLAND COUNCIL Respondent - NOTICE OF PERSON’S WISH TO BE PARTY TO PROCEEDINGS Section 274 Resource Management Act 1991 TO: the Registrar Environment Court PO Box 7147 Wellesley Str

3. Justice Matters - issue 01 - December 2015 [pdf, 2.8 MB]

   ...Ministry of Justice’s newsletter for everyone with an interest in a safe and just New Zealand. Every 3 months we will update you on our activities and share some of our successes on our way to delivering modern, accessible and people-centred justice services to New Zealanders. We can only achieve this goal with the support of our partners and stakeholders. The breadth of what we do may surprise some. In this issue we cover everything from a Treaty of Waitangi settlement to the reform of tr...

4. OIA-120394.pdf [pdf, 12 MB]

   ...Ministry of Justice If you are not satisfied with this response, you have the right to make a complaint to the Ombudsman under section 28(3) of the Act. The Office of the Ombudsman may be contacted by email at info@ombudsman.parliament.nz or by phone on 0800 802 602. Nāku noa, nā Georgina Matheson General Manager, Communications and Ministerial Services https://www.justice.govt.nz/about/official-information-act-requests/oia-responses/ Table 1: Documents in scope of requ...

5. [2007] NZEmpC WC 3/07 Tamarua v Toll NZ Consolidated Ltd [pdf, 46 KB]

   ...refrigerated freight. Heinz Watties Ltd (Watties) is one of the most important customers of the Hastings branch. Toll transports Watties products to its customers and delivers any return products, including those that are damaged, back to Watties. A service level agreement with Watties documents this process. Watties is stringent about not allowing damaged stock into circulation. [6] About 98 to 99 percent of damaged product is returned to Watties and only rarely is it so badly...

6. Greenwood v REAA & Leaders Bay Cities Ltd [2012] NZREADT 14 [pdf, 181 KB]

   ...not sell it at this price. The Greenwoods claim that this was the first time that they had heard this. Mrs Greenwood said that the appraisal from Mr Horton had been $330,000 to $379,500 which they were very happy with. Ms Domney said that if the service had not been up to expectations then they should have gone elsewhere and handed them a letter terminating the agency agreement. Ms Domney agreed that the meeting was four minutes long but felt that the service given to the Greenwoods ha...

7. BD v EG LCRO 107/2012 (26 Aug 2015) [pdf, 54 KB]

   ...because she “would like to make specific changes to her will”. His note records the results of title searches he carried out for her, and her instructions to him regarding her family, and asset position. [5] Mr EG’s file notes record a phone conversation he had with Ms BD on 18 July 2011 explaining he had concerns about the 2004 draft, and the lack of clear provision for HH. He recorded his concerns, including the absence of a guardian appointed for HH under clause 3, and s...

8. DF Ltd v TS Ltd [2021] NZDT 1315 (21 April 2021) [pdf, 233 KB]

   ...TS Limited is to pay DF Limited $6,187.15 on or before Thursday 6 May 2021. Reasons: 1. TS Limited (TS) hired DF Limited (DF) to convert an 8-wheeler truck to a 6-wheeler truck and attach a water tank to the truck. DF says its invoice for services rendered has not been paid. TS says that the work was not carried out in accordance with the engineer’s instructions and that it has incurred significant cost to rectify and complete the work. 2. DF claims $13,827.15 from TS in rel

9. 2022-03-08-Minute-re-General-Information-Disclosure-No-1.pdf [pdf, 136 KB]

   ...role and processes of hospital following the attack/during the immediate response? 38 Did CDHB appropriately activate and use emergency polices? 39 Was there coordination in preparing to respond to a terrorist attack and coordination of emergency services? 40 What is the reason for discrepancies between time of death and mobile communications? 41 What is the reason for inconsistencies in the timeline of the shootings? 42 Not all families have been given information such as the DVI...

10. K Ltd v UD [2024] NZDT 568 (15 July 2024) [pdf, 248 KB]

    ...UD’s claim: Was the pool base prepared and placed with reasonable care and skill, and was the placement fit for the purpose? 16. By virtue of sections 28 and 29 of the Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 (CGA), K Ltd was required to carry out all services it supplied to UD with reasonable care and skill and so that they were reasonably fit for the purpose. In this case that included K Ltd’s preparation of the base and the placing of the pool into the excavated hole. The standard requ...