Search Results

1. REAA CAC 10054 v Hume [2014] NZREADT 10 [pdf, 82 KB]

   ...belligerence on the part of the applicant. That would be an unfortunate trait in a real estate salesperson. Such persons might easily become embroiled in disputes with consumers, their principals, other agents, and members of the public. Many of the responses referred to above by the defendant, in terms of his problems with the Law 4 Society and clients, indicate that he reacts to issues belligerently and unprofessionally, and obsessively insists on what he regards as his rig...

2. [2014] NZEmpC 44 Fox v Hereworth School Trust Board No3 interlocutory [pdf, 74 KB]

   ...Stephen Fox. The request is made pursuant to the Privacy Act 1993. These documents are not relevant to the proceeding and do not need to be disclosed to the plaintiff by ACL. [24] The document at page 14 of the schedule is the Police’s pro forma response to Mr Abraham dated 21 September 2012 and is similarly not relevant to the proceeding. [25] The document at page 15 of the schedule is a covering letter (but not its contents) from the Police to Mr Abraham dated 25 Sep...

3. [2014] NZEmpC 88 Mega Wreckers Limited v Taafuli [pdf, 72 KB]

   ...[2002] 2 ERNZ 103 (EmpC) at [8]. Discussion [10] In opposition to the application for leave, the representative for the respondent, Mr Ogilvie, raised a number of issues. First he submitted that while Mr Bennett was attempting to take responsibility for the delay, the primary cause for the lateness in filing the challenge was “the inaction” of the applicant in failing to give instructions to proceed with the challenge until 5 February 2014, which was already past the...

4. [2015] NZEmpC 81 Bracewell v Richmond Services Ltd costs [pdf, 88 KB]

   ...decisions of New Zealand Fire Service Commission v Reid, 2 and Asiaciti Trust New Zealand Limited v Harris 3 were relied on to support this submission. Costs of $250 plus GST were also sought with regard to the application for costs. [5] In response to the application for costs, Ms Bracewell submitted that she considered her applications to have been meritorious, and that she continued to believe that there had been a perversion of justice. She submitted that the Court had b...

5. Māori Trustee v Lidgard - Kapenga H (2014) 97 Waiariki MB 282 (97 WAR 282) [pdf, 142 KB]

   ...of itself means that the onus of proof lies on the tenant in this case. I asked the question of how machinery such as this could be more permanently affixed than by the welding of rods and the use of bolted clamps. I received no satisfactory response. I am of the view that the milking plant is firmly annexed to the milking shed and therefore I must turn to the question of the purpose of annexation. [18] The purpose of annexation is to be viewed from an objective sense. The best...

6. GF v UH LCRO 178 / 2011 (2 November 2011) [pdf, 62 KB]

   ...had originally been sought. Complaint [5] The Applicant‟s complaint against the Practitioner was that he had failed to take all reasonable steps to pursue the application for review of ACC‟s refusal to pay the lump sum. [6] In his response to the complaint the Practitioner informed the Standards Committee that the application for review of ACC‟s decision had been withdrawn because it had no prospect of succeeding. He said that the Applicant was aware of the legisla...

7. JA & JA Bradley Family Trust v Auckland City Council [2010] NZWHT Auckland 37 [pdf, 63 KB]

   ...Tribunal, that there was no jurisdiction for the Tribunal to consider an appeal from its own decision. However, on the day that the purported appeal was filed, and before any direction could be issued by the Tribunal, counsel for Sky filed a response. In my view this was unnecessary therefore I decline to award costs for this step. [18] I conclude that Sky is entitled to costs based on the District Court scale on a 2B basis. Costs incurred are set out in Schedule C to the...

8. White v Rodney District Council [pdf, 24 KB]

   ...deliberately delay proceedings or frustrate meaningful and sensible attempts to settle the claim. 9. The claimants then replied by stating that the second respondent misstates factual events and that essentially there is nothing in Mrs Kerkin’s response to deflect the claimants’ request that the Tribunal order an award of costs under section 91. 10. The claimants’ submissions expand on their allegation that Mrs Kerkin’s defence to the liability for breach of the...

9. Baigent v ACC [2011] NZACA 3 [pdf, 166 KB]

   ...entitlement to ERC. [21] Notwithstanding, it appears that the appellant’s ERC was in fact reinstated for the period from 5 May 1980 (and not 1 April 1981 as suggested for the appellant). [22] Similarly, the relevance of the Corporation’s responsibility for destroying or losing the appellant’s file (pursuant to s.66) is equally difficult to gleam from the written submissions for the appellant. [23] The Corporation is not required to retain physical files indefini...

10. Morgan v ACC [2011] NZACA 2 [pdf, 188 KB]

    ...entitlement to ERC. [21] Notwithstanding, it appears that the appellant's ERC was in fact reinstated for the period from 5 May 1980 (and not 1 April 1981 as suggested for the appellant). [22] Similarly, the relevance of the Corporation's responsibility for destroying or losing the appellant's file (pursuant to s.66) is equally difficult to glean from the written submissions for the appellant. [23] The Corporation is not required to retain physical files indefinitely....