Search Results

1. ADW Ltd v ZWC Ltd [2010] NZDT 243 (25 November 2010) [pdf, 56 KB]

   ...Disputes Tribunals Act 1988 that the Applicant, ADW Ltd, is not liable to the Respondent, ZWC Ltd, for the $618.75 specified in its invoice #5414 of 29 March 2010. Facts [1] ADW Ltd required certain engineering calculations to be made in relation to an outdoor awning proposed for a premises it was fitting out. ZWC Ltd visited the site and emailed ADW Ltd an estimate of the cost to do the work of $200.00 + GST (for the site visit) and 5–6 hours at $150.00/hour + GST. This...

2. Media release for annual suicide statistics for 2013/14 [pdf, 274 KB]

   ...when returned to New Zealand and have determined cause of death. Our Coronial system does not have jurisdiction over deaths that occur outside of New Zealand, and in which a body is not repatriated. ENDS Note: The information provided relates to provisional suicide figures and will slightly differ from the Ministry of Health figures. They include active cases before Coroners where intent has yet to be established therefore may eventually be found not to be suicides. In ad...

3. Auckland Standards Committee v Lee [2015] NZLCDT 42 [pdf, 21 KB]

   ...contends that his behaviour was “de minimis”. He refers us to two further decisions which have been released since the liability hearing. These decisions, one of the Real Estate Agents Disciplinary Tribunal and one of the High Court, both relate back to the District Court proceedings and the underlying transaction, which gave rise to the conduct in respect of which Mr Lee has been found guilty. [4] We accept, from the content of those decisions, that Mr Lee has been further...

4. Otago Standards Committee v Saunderson-Warner [2013] NZLCDT 24 [pdf, 44 KB]

   ...Gough Dr I McAndrew Mr P Radich Ms S Sage On the Papers 2 RESERVED DECISION OF NEW ZEALAND LAWYERS AND CONVEYANCERS DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL ON PENALTY Introduction [1] The Tribunal released a reserved decision in relation to charges, dismissing one and in respect of the other, finding the practitioner guilty of unsatisfactory conduct. This decision was released on 24 April 2013 and submissions were sought concerning penalty. Counsel have now filed...

5. Eaglesome v Department of Corrections (Interim Orders) [2015] NZHRRT 20 [pdf, 38 KB]

   ...These proceedings were filed on 9 February 2015. A few days later, on 13 February 2015, Mr Eaglesome sought an interim order requiring the defendant to adhere to an agreement dated 29 August 2014 between Mr Eaglesome and the Department of Corrections relating to the provision to Mr Eaglesome of food which conformed to a kosher diet. Mr Eaglesome submitted that if the interim order was not granted he would be forced to eat non-kosher meals and foodstuffs. This would have a significant im...

6. DE v WX LCRO 211 / 2010 (21 June 2011) [pdf, 44 KB]

   ...consider was a matter more properly raised with her lawyer rather than with the Respondent. I observed that the Applicant had also raised complaints about her own lawyer, and noted that this matter could be further pursued at the review hearing relating to that file. [11] The further complaint concerned the Respondent’s failure to have provided the Applicant with a letter of engagement. At the review hearing I discussed with the 3 Applicant the provisions of Rule 3.7 of t...

7. CPA Form 1 Notice of application for leave to appeal for pre-trial appeal [pdf, 29 KB]

   ...………………......……………………………………………………………………… ………………......……………………………………………………………………… 10. (a) If your proposed appeal relates to the admissibility of evidence proposed to be called at the trial, outline (on a separate sheet, if necessary) the disputed evidence in question and its relevance to the trial: ………………………………………………�...

8. White v Rodney District Council [pdf, 53 KB]

   ...partake in settlement negotiations and mediation, and an early resolution was not frustrated by any deliberate refusal to participate by her. It was also found that Mrs Kerkin did not pursue litigation in defiance of reason or common sense, and in relation to some her defending arguments, the Tribunal held that Mrs Kerkin could not have discerned the weakness of her case earlier than its exposure at the hearing. Moreover, section 57(2) of the Act also requires that in managing adjudica...

9. Langhorne v ACC [2010] NZACA 12 [pdf, 23 KB]

   ...is contained at pages 24 to 27. The Appeal Authority determined that the respondent has no status at review. [10] At paragraph [177], the Appeal Authority approved the concluding submissions for the appellant, which included: “... Until relatively recently the Corporation also accepted that it did not have the right to attend 1982 Act review hearings unless the applicant consented ...” [11] The question in respect to the first ground, is whether the respondent is entitled...

10. McDonald v Peters [2011] NZWHT Auckland 38 [pdf, 45 KB]

    ...council had not proved that there was no tenable case against it. [18] The council had shown untenability by the second application but as that decision was reversed on appeal the tribunal is not in a position to award costs. [19] In relation to the third application it has been dealt with as soon after the appeal as was practicable. Accordingly the situation does not attain the level where unnecessary costs have been incurred. [20] The application for costs is dec...