Search Results

1. Berry v Rondel LCRO 130 / 2011 (26 April 2012) - Penalty Decision [pdf, 143 KB]

   ...compensation to Ms Berry?” LCRO: “yes - up to $25,000.00” Mr Rondel: “I would like that to be entertained” [23] At another stage in the hearing Mr Rondel stated: I should be offering to Rosalie to cover her legal costs out of my own resources in having to pursue this [24] Costs incurred in Court proceedings are dealt with by the Court. They are not part of any compensation that could be ordered by a Standards Committee or the LCRO. Whether Mr Rondel fulfils his stated...

2. Updated EC Topic Structure incl party comments and Council response 17 November 16 [xls, 93 KB]

   ...modelling in relation to this topic. The modelling proposed relates to plan enabled capacity and updated modelling is now required because some of the base information has changed. In relation to the timetable proposed, the Council is working through resourcing constraints and will advise the Court whether the timetable proposed can be met as soon as possible. ENV-2016-AKL-000206 Cato Bolam Consultants Ltd [5]; [8] (re 011) Cabra Rural Developments Ltd Federated Farmers of New Zealand Fo...

3. [2018] NZEmpC 43 A Labour Inspector v Smiths City Group Ltd [pdf, 503 KB]

   ...alcohol, could not have visitors without prior permission and was not to disturb residents during the night. He could only engage in a very limited range of other activities. His privacy was limited and he did not have access to the comforts and resources of his home. [35] The remaining two factors also indicated sleepover was work. The Court held that the greater and more extensive the responsibilities placed on the employee the more likely the period was work.12 Mr Dickson...

4. LCRO 138/2015 AZ, VY and CX v DW and EV [pdf, 260 KB]

   ...existing relation between Mr BY and Mr EV who was Mr BY’s accountant. 17 [79] Ms CX advised the respondents by email on 7 November 2013, that an intense phase of preparation was about to commence and the firm could not “commit significant resources” to the file. That did not result in fees being brought up to date. [80] Instead, extensive discussions between Mr BY and Mr EV ensued, culminating in the Deed relating to payment of fees being signed on 21 November 2013....

5. Apostolakis v Gilbert (Decision) [2018] NZHRRT 22 [pdf, 290 KB]

   ...adjournment was granted. See the Minute dated 10 March 2017. [7] The current application for adjournment is suggestive of a pattern of conduct. Decision [8] As stated in the Minute dated 15 February 2017, hearing time before the Tribunal is a limited resource and adjournments cannot be lightly granted. Where the parties have received more than ample notice of a date of hearing the Tribunal must insist on the hearing going ahead unless there are truly proper grounds for an adjournmen...

6. 2017 NZSSAA 052 (15 September 2017) [pdf, 238 KB]

   ...for themselves.”6 [71] In proceedings before this Authority, the Chief Executive of the Ministry of Social Development is the formal respondent in all appeals. Given that the other party is often a person who is vulnerable and likely to lack resources, the Chief Executive is given exceptional responsibilities to provide the information this Authority needs to make fair and correct decisions.7 In Chief Executive of the Ministry of Social Development v Genet Williams J said, at [...

7. Firmin v The Committee of Management of Atihau Whanganui Incorporation - Atihau Whanganui Incorporation (2016) 352 Aotea MB 233 (352 AOT 233) [pdf, 329 KB]

   ...Mr Firmin with the opportunity to address the hui-a-tau with his concerns. It might be sensible to do so. But any purported order of the Court to that effect might amount to an interference with the Incorporation’s right to manage its land and resources as it considers 16 [2010] Māori Appellate Court MB 566 (2010 APPEAL 566) 352 Aotea MB 249 appropriate, in the absence of any evidence of wrongdoing contrary to the Act...

8. Cooper v Hamilton Pharmacy 2011 Ltd (Strike-Out Application) [2017] NZHRRT 38 [pdf, 439 KB]

   ...much the same circumstances. [58] It is submitted there is every opportunity for the different courts and tribunals to pronounce differently on the facts and on the same or similar issues. [59] The defendants also refer to the substantial judicial resources which will be occupied as well as the significant consequences for the parties. Those consequences include the fact that witnesses will be required for each proceeding, despite not being directly involved in the dispute. There wil...

9. Nelson Lawyers Standards Committee v Stevenson [2020] NZLCDT 42 (15 December 2020) [pdf, 380 KB]

   ...(which will be addressed in another section) is of particular concern because of the serious adverse consequences, both potential and actual for his clients. [42] The damage to the defendant and prosecution alike, and the wastefulness of public resources cannot be understated. The reputation of the profession has also undoubtedly been harmed. [43] Likewise, the non-too-subtle implied threat to the police officer is conduct totally unacceptable in any lawyer. Aggravating Feature...

10. [2017] NZEmpC 97 Nel v ASB Bank [pdf, 216 KB]

    ...to have the application for leave heard as soon as possible. [90] Second, I accept that two key factors which underpin the application for leave to appeal relate to the scope of the order of disclosure which was made, including the extent of resources which ASB says is required to comply with it. There are also, potentially, significant privacy issues. [91] I interpolate that if the application for leave to appeal is dismissed, these matters can and will be managed by appropri...