Search Results

1. [2022] NZEmpC 122 Reunited Employees Assoc Inc v Nelmac Ltd [pdf, 223 KB]

   ...[44] There is a broader consideration, however, about whether it would be in the interests of justice to order security for costs.28 An order is usually accompanied by a stay until security is paid or otherwise provided. Given REA’s limited resources the reality is that an order is unlikely to be complied with and the resulting stay will effectively end this litigation. [45] An order having the effect of stopping the litigation in its tracks has obvious consequences for the uni...

2. Dixon v Accident Compensation Corporation (Leave to appeal to the High Court) [2022] NZACC 251 [pdf, 240 KB]

   ...[1963] NZLR 339, 353-354 (CA); Edwards v Bairstow [1995] 3 All ER 48, 57; [25] Even if the qualifying criteria are made out, the Court has an extensive discretion in the grant or refusal of leave, so as to ensure proper use of scarce judicial resources. Leave is not to be granted as a matter of course. One factor in the grant of leave is the wider importance of any contended point of law; e.g. Jackson and Kenyon above. [5] An error of law will also arise where a decision is wro...

3. KN v T Ltd [2023] NZDT 106 (28 February 2023) [pdf, 230 KB]

   ...NZDT 106 APPLICANT KN RESPONDENT T Ltd The Tribunal orders: KN is to pay $5,800.00 to T Ltd on or before 20 March 2023. REASONS Brief Details of Claims 1. KN owns a property at [Address]. KN submitted an Application for Resource Consent to subdivide the property into three lots. There was an existing house on the proposed Lot 1. 2. During the period December 2021 to March 2022, T Ltd carried out work on the property at KN’s request. The work involved const...

4. AB v CD Ltd [2022] NZDT 87 (23 June 2022) [pdf, 109 KB]

   ...industry-based disclaimer about the content and use of the property inspection report. CD accepts it is likely in these circumstances that this attachment was not emailed with the handwritten report, as CDL’s full office and administrative resources were not available to him at that time. Was the building report carried out with reasonable care and skill and was it fit for purpose? 11. The Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 (“CGA”) applies to this contract because th...

5. DI v C Ltd [2024] NZDT 114 (10 April 2024) [pdf, 232 KB]

   ...in situations like this they are under no obligation to relist properties as they already have an agreement in place by way of a confirmed booking. MB further says Christmas is a very busy period of their staff and they did not have the time or the resource to take the steps DI wanted them to take. 34. While I accept, under their terms and conditions, C Ltd was under no obligation to relist the property, I believe this term was harsh in the circumstances of this case. I do agree with D...

6. Appointments-Ministers-Arms-Advisory-Group_FINAL.pdf [pdf, 1.3 MB]

   ...responsible Minister you make appointments and receive advice 19. As the Minister responsible for the Act, you appoint the chairperson and members and receive advice from the MAAG. 20. As the agency administering the Act, we provide the necessary resources and administrative support to enable the group to perform its functions. As part of this, we provide you with advice on appointments and facilitate interactions between yourself and the MAAG, including providing their formal advice....

7. BM & IM v KX & Ors [2024] NZDT 162 (8 February 2024) [pdf, 218 KB]

   ...real estate agent 22. BM and IM claimed MI Ltd failed to review documents sent by their real estate agent before advising them about the purchase of the section. These documents included a geotechnical report as well as a report about a possible resource consent application for land use. They said this amounted to a failure of reasonable care and skill. 23. At the hearing IM said MI Ltd should have received the documents from the real estate agent on 8 December 2019, prior to the co...

8. [2024] NZEmpC 7 Amazonia Midco 1 Holdings Ltd v Harding [pdf, 222 KB]

   ...Broadspectrum (NZ) Ltd v Nathan [2017] NZCA 434, [2017] ERNZ 733, applying Keung v GBR Investment Ltd [2010] NZCA 396, [2012] NZAR 17 at [11], and Dymocks Franchise Systems (NSW) Pty Ltd v Bilgola Enterprises Ltd (1999) 13 PRNZ 48 (HC) at [9]. 4 Bathurst Resources Ltd v L & M Coal Holdings Ltd [2020] NZCA 186, (2020) 25 PRNZ 341 at [19]. [8] In weighing the competing factors, regard will be as to the balance of convenience. Overarching consideration will then be give...

9. [2023] NZEmpC 161 Te Whatu Ora – Health New Zealand v CultureSafe NZ Ltd (in liq) [pdf, 280 KB]

   ...involving witnesses, the Courts have developed useful factors for consideration such as which proceeding was commenced first; the potential effect each proceeding may have on the other; the public interest; duplication of witnesses and issues of wasted resources; the state of advancement of the subject proceeding; and whether there is any issue of a multiplicity of proceedings involving the same subject matter arising.8 [8] Only some of these considerations are relevant here since t...

10. KC v DG [2023] NZDT 108 (22 March 2023) [pdf, 241 KB]

    ...approaches. KC clearly considered it had not had an opportunity to do that. 31. In addition, DG accepted that KC contacted him sometime before 12 August 2022 to suggest trying to contact [redacted] (the company handling DG’s employer’s human resource matters). DG begrudgingly agreed to do so, although he considered that the tone in KC’s voice was less than optimistic. 32. However, it cannot be a lack of reasonable care and skill to attempt a resolution through all possible re...