Search Results

1. [2019] NZEmpC 147 Baker v Hauraki Rail Trail Ltd [pdf, 273 KB]

   ...own orders and that such compliance could be made against any person.4 Secondly it held that to join the directors of the company for the purposes of enforcement was not a matter of lifting the corporate veil, but rather of establishing who was responsible for carrying out the employer’s obligations; it was 3 Northern Clerical IUOW v Lawrence Publishing Co of New Zealand Ltd [1990] 1 NZILR 717 (LC) (Northern Clerical). 4 At 720-...

2. Hutana - Estate of Te Whe Ariki Hutana (2019) 57 Te Waipounamu MB 27 (57 TWP 27) [pdf, 320 KB]

   ...follows. Restraining order over the estate accounts [7] During the course of the hearing on 11 June 2019, Mr Ormsby as counsel for Mr Reginald Hutana (an interested party) made an oral application for an order freezing the estate accounts. In response to my observation that Huia Williamson may need to access the estate’s accounts to meet the reasonable and properly incurred expenses of the estate, Mr Ormsby indicated that the order sought was not a complete freeze of the estate...

3. [2020] NZEmpC 236 Maheta v Skybus New Zealand Ltd [pdf, 259 KB]

   ...costs order against him. First, because the Authority’s costs decision remains unsatisfied. Second, because Mr Maheta has provided information about his financial circumstances which indicates he is struggling financially. [55] In response, Mr Maheta argued that the cause of his present difficulties was entirely because of Skybus’ decision. On that basis he argued that it would not be appropriate to impose an order for security for costs because that would have th...

4. Ngāi Tahu Ki Murihiku - EiC - D Whaanga - Culture (5 Feb 2021) [PDF, 440 KB]

   ...Ngāi Tahu ki Murihiku with the lands and waters of Te Mata-au and the Catlins. 6. Therefore, my evidence will explain the following things: (a) Our whakapapa, and our whānau relationships with Te Mata-au and the Catlins, (b) Our responsibilities as mana whenua to act for the benefit of waters and lands throughout our takiwā, ki uta ki tai (from the mountains to the sea); and (c) Mātauranga (our knowledge) and tikanga (our practices) that guide how we act as ka...

5. 2020 NZEnvC 113 Ahuareka Trustees no 2 Limited v Auckland Council [pdf, 11 MB]

   ...application). The Appellant relentlessly pursued this argument regardless of being put on notice that it was without merit, requiring the Council to address the matter again in legal submissions at the hearing. The Council's submissions in response to this point form Attachment A to the Council's opening submissions. 31. It is submitted that, in this way, the Appellant has conducted its case in a way that unnecessarily lengthened the hearing and as a result the Council has...

6. [2020] NZREADT 27 – Deng v Real Estate Agents Authority (25 June 2020) [pdf, 214 KB]

   ...r 5.1 of the Rules and was unsatisfactory conduct. Reference to the Glovers agreement in the new Agency agreements [30] It is evident on the face of both of the two new Agency agreements that they do not refer to the Glovers agency agreement in response to cl 3.2: “The Client has appointed the following real estate agent/s prior to signing this agreement”. They refer only to “Barfoot Pt Chevalier”, noting the “period of agency” as “end on 20/10/2018”....

7. [2021] NZEmpC 71 Bowen v Bank of New Zealand [pdf, 241 KB]

   ...employee is dismissed or disadvantaged unjustifiably in retaliation for making a protected disclosure under the Protected Disclosures Act, the way to a remedy for that claimed wrong is by raising a personal grievance. So the appropriate statutory response for retaliation for making a protected disclosure is the same as for any other statutory personal grievance.14 [25] This will mean that, in considering whether the actions of BNZ in relation to the redundancy were ones that were o...

8. [2021] NZEmpC 88 Panapa v Spotless Facility Services (NZ) Ltd [pdf, 222 KB]

   ...complained to it about alleged workplace bullying. Ms Panapa claims this is an unjustifiable disadvantage. Spotless emphatically denies these claims and says it takes the health and safety of its employees very seriously. In its view, it acted responsibly towards Ms Panapa at all times. It does not believe any bullying of Ms Panapa took place. [2] In a preliminary determination, the Employment Relations Authority (the Authority) found that Ms Panapa’s personal grievance was...

9. [2020] NZIACDT 19 - DMX v Guich (11 May 2020) [pdf, 112 KB]

   ...Immigration New Zealand by undated letter sent by email on 12 February 2018. It was argued that the complainant’s position substantially matched that of a hotel service manager for the reasons set out. Support documents were attached to the response. [12] Immigration New Zealand declined the residence application by letter on 23 February 2018 addressed to both the complainant and Mr Guich.1 Her employment did not match the description of hotel service manager. They were advise...

10. [2020] NZIACDT 25 - RV v Aiolupotea (12 June 2020) [pdf, 164 KB]

    ...raising a concern about the length of time the complainant was spending in New Zealand. His comments were invited. [18] Mr Aiolupotea met the complainant on 9 March 2018 to discuss Immigration New Zealand’s letter. [19] As there was no response to the letter by the deadline of 14 March 2018, Immigration New Zealand declined the visa in a letter to Mr Aiolupotea on 15 March 4 2018. The interim visa therefore expired, so the agency stated that the complainant was in N...