Search Results

1. [2009] NZEmpC AC 28/09 Filta Vacuum Products Ltd v Dolan [pdf, 43 KB]

   ...set out to increase costs for the defendant. He relied on the Authority’s findings concerning the view Mr Black formed as to the defendant being guilty of fraud and pursuing this conclusion without giving proper attention to the defendant’s responses. He submitted this was recognised by the Authority’s substantial award of compensation to the defendant, reduced through contributory conduct. He submitted the plaintiff had doggedly maintained these serious allegations and used v...

2. [2006] NZEmpC AC 49/06 National Distribution Union & Anor v General Distributors & Anor [pdf, 59 KB]

   ...previously been supplied to the second defendant’s service centre. [27] Next, the evidence is that when it was put to Linfox managers that they were breaching s97 by undertaking the work usually done by the defendants’ employees, their responses addressed the effect of the unions’ involvement with Linfox staff, alleged threats to the employment of their staff and to the relationships between NDU and Linfox but did not amount to a denial of the undertaking of work tha...

3. [2012] NZEmpC 5 Bishop & Bishop v Bennett [pdf, 90 KB]

   ...measure of latitude to parties who appear in person. In fairness to other parties who may be represented, however, any such indulgence must be strictly limited. As I expressly pointed out to Mr Bishop at an early stage in this litigation, it is the responsibility of persons representing themselves to become aware of the relevant rules and to abide by them. What will always be required is that parties comply with specific directions given by the Court. [27] In this case, the plain...

4. [2015] NZEmpC 178 Twentyman v The Warehouse Ltd interlocutory [pdf, 116 KB]

   ...this sum. Rather, I think the situation can be dealt with most justly by requiring the plaintiff to give security for the costs and disbursements ordered by the Authority and in respect of which the plaintiff has taken no step to meet her responsibilities, but as a condition of granting a stay of execution of the remedies by TWL. I exclude from that sum the penalty ordered by the Authority to be paid to the defendant. Penalties are in a different category to costs and, al...

5. Gailbraith v CAC 10012 & McNabb [2011] NZREADT 18 [pdf, 138 KB]

   ...Kellands and Bayleys and he does not need to concern himself with that issue. They assert that they were the best people to transact the purchase. On 12 March Mr Buckley tables an offer to the McNabbs through Kellands. There was some delay in the response by the McNabbs. It appears that Kellands were told that the McNabbs would not accept an offer on a Kellands Real Estate Agency form. On 29 March 2010 Mrs Galbraith e-mails Mr Buckley. This e-mail was found to be disparag...

6. ENVC paper Best Practice Appeals Proposed Plans Policy 2012 [pdf, 167 KB]

   ...http://www.rmla.org.nz/upload/files/a_better_approach_to_improving_the_rma_plan_process.pdf  Second Report of the Land and Water Forum, May 2012  Faster, Higher, Stronger – or just Wrong?, Russell McVeach, July 2012 http://rmla.org.nz/upload/files/response_to_lowf_120712.pdf http://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/SiteCollectionDocuments/aboutcouncil/governingbody/governingb http://www.rmla.org.nz/upload/files/a_better_approach_to_improving_the_rma_plan_process.pdf http:/...

7. Wilson - Oue 2B3 [2015] Chief Judge's MB 215 (2015 CJ 215) [pdf, 219 KB]

   ...Community Law Centre and was given an appointment with another lawyer for 16 October 2013. [7] The applicant states that by 25 March 2014 he had met with 17 lawyers to no avail, and therefore he filed the s 45 application himself. He received a response dated 31 March 2014 in which the Deputy Registrar advised that the application was not accepted as it required further information. [8] The applicant states that a friend’s lawyer referred him to an Auckland law firm. A lawye...

8. Paniora v Kereopa - Waipoua 2B3D2A2A and Waipoua 2B3D2A2B2C (2015) 99 Taitokerau MB 227 (99 TTK 227) [pdf, 568 KB]

   ...need for me to invoke s 21(2) of the Fencing Act 1978. I determine that the fence was situated wholly within the Paniora block. As far as the damage to the fence is concerned, Mrs Kereopa did not deny that she or those under her instruction were responsible for cutting the fence. Mr Paniora claims $485.00 for having to repair the fence. I accept that amount is fair and conclude that Mrs Kereopa is responsible for the damage. Orders [37] Mr Elrick’s plan and his marking of the...

9. Hape v Smith - Part Te Pupuke K No 2 (Māori Reservation) (2015) 99 Taitokerau MB 174 (99 TTK 174) [pdf, 189 KB]

   ...2014, Mr Smith advised that he had never been informed of trustee meetings. 13 [38] Both Darryl Hape and Tangi Rudolph gave evidence as to the process for notifying trustee meetings. Mr Hape advised that Hazel Hape, a trustee of the trust, is responsible for notifying the other trustees of trustee meetings. His evidence was that Ms Hape does so by advertising in local newspapers and contacting the trustees directly by telephone. Mr Hape states that as far as he knows Mr Smith...

10. Varsanyi v CAC 10048 & McMillan [2012] NZREADT 78 [pdf, 125 KB]

    ...property was advertised for offers over $575,000 does not automatically mean a party that viewed the property will be offering over that price. After all, the Hibberts made an offer below that price after viewing the property and that was probably in response to the same advertisement. There was therefore no assurance that the Cottinghams would have offered over $575,000 if they chose to make an offer at all. 3 4.3 The Committee is satisfied that the complainant was infor...