Search Results

1. [2012] NZEmpC 41 Port of Tauranga Ltd v Rail and Maritime Transport Union Inc & Anor [pdf, 69 KB]

   ...These events took place at about 0230 hours on 3 March 2012. [8] Sometime later that day it appeared that the picket line had been lifted and the vessel was able to dock with the assistance of linesmen employee members of the RMTU who are responsible for the tying up and letting go of all shipping that enters the Port of Tauranga. The picket line was then reformed after the vessel was tied up. Employees were instructed to carry out crane driving duties which they refused....

2. Rogers v CAC 10028 & McGillen [2011] NZREADT 14 [pdf, 86 KB]

   ...[34] We agree with the submission of Mr Hodge that as one of the agents acting jointly for the vendors the appellant cannot disassociate himself from the action of his co-agents Ms Wither and Ms Thompson – they were individually and collectively responsible for information supplied to the McGillens in the course of negotiations. [35] Unfortunately we did not have any independent and qualified evidence relating to the “work in” practice of agents to consider but it is abundantly pla...

3. CAC 10043 v Brooker [2011] NZREADT 24 [pdf, 91 KB]

   ...Grigg dated 19 April 2010; (b) An affidavit of Shaun Miller. Mr Miller was a senior investigator with the REAA and attached to his affidavit was a file note made on 29 June 2010 of a telephone conversation with Mr Baird in which he put to him the response from Ms Brooker to his complaint. Mr Miller recorded Mr Baird’s comments in a job sheet. (c) The affidavit of Gay Michelle Grigg. Ms Grigg deposes to the fact that after the purchase of the property Mr Baird telephoned the d...

4. LB & QB v REAA & LI [2011] NZREADT 39 [pdf, 106 KB]

   ...and the buyer regarding the use of the property. The Committee then had to consider whether acting as a conduit in passing on the information constitutes a breach of section 72 or section 73. It was the Committee’s view that the licensee’s responsibilities do not extend to interpreting titles to this level. The complainant’s solicitor was the correct person to perform this service and has done so ensuring his clients’ interests were protected ...” The Title to the Sub...

5. ENVC Hearing 6Oct14 AC rebuttal Richard Reinen-Hamill [pdf, 4.2 MB]

   ...opinions. Page 3 31555401:629148 SCOPE OF EVIDENCE 6. This rebuttal statement responds to issues raised in the section 274 party evidence of Moana Te Aira Te Uri Karaka Te Waeroa, Lucy Tukua and Thomas Greve and Kirstin Lewis. RESPONSE TO SECTION 274 PARTY EVIDENCE Moana Te Aira Te Uri Karaka Te Waeroa and Lucy Anne Tukua 7. The last paragraph of page 3 of the statement of evidence of Moana Te Aira Te Uri Karaka Te Waeroa, dated 22 July 2014, includes...

6. Waaka - Te Manawa o Tuhoe A block (2014) 103 Waiariki MB 2 (103 WAR 2) [pdf, 267 KB]

   ...application to the Court to rescind or vary the order. (4) An application to the Court under this section may be made by the trustees, or by any of them, or by any person beneficially interested under the trust. [20] It is said that the applicant was a responsible trustee from July 2011 until May 2012. It is obvious that before I can exercise the jurisdiction under s64, I must be of the opinion that this payment is expedient in the management or administration of the property veste...

7. Goher v Hammadieh [2015] NZIACDT 44 (22 April 2015) [pdf, 92 KB]

   ...fees when the complainant sought the return of her documents. [6.3.2] He delayed returning the documents in the period from 3 April 2014 to 18 May 2014, while seeking additional payments, and did ultimately return them using regular post. The responses [7] Mr Hammadieh did not file a statement of reply; he was not required to do so if he accepted the contents of the Statement of Complaint. Mr Hammadieh indicated to the Registrar he was taking leave, and modified address details. He w...

8. [2014] NZEmpC 172 Bracewell v Richmond Services Ltd [pdf, 75 KB]

   ...sum of $2,000. It also stated that costs should follow the event. A direction was made for any application and evidence to be filed, by Richmond Services Limited (Richmond); and for Ms Bracewell to file and serve any submissions and evidence in response. 4 [4] Ms Bracewell has filed an application for leave to appeal the Court’s judgment. It is understood that application is yet to be heard. [5] Ms Bracewell has also applied to this Court for “a stay of proceedings”,...

9. [2014] NZEmpC 182 Fletcher v Sharp Studhope Lawyers [pdf, 75 KB]

   ...circumstances it must be struck out. [22] It may be that the parties can agree costs. If that does not prove possible STL may file and serve any memoranda within 15 working days of today’s date with Mr Fletcher filing and serving any memoranda in response within a further 15 working days. Christina Inglis Judge Judgment signed at 3.30 pm on 26 September 2014 11 Murray v Morel & Co Ltd above n 4, at [33]....

10. ENVC Hearing 6Oct14 AT rebuttal Anthony Blom [pdf, 126 KB]

    ...From a public transport perspective, use of Pier 3 and Pier 4 does not currently interfere with the ferry service, and the bus service on the island is not scheduled to coincide with the use of these Piers. Nonetheless, AT supports the continued responsible use of Pier 3 and Pier 4, as currently occurs. 16 Ms McCann supports greater competition in the transport service market, and is concerned that the proposed marina will prevent this because it will hinder access to existing or ne...