Search Results

1. [2023] NZEmpC 168 AJY v Chief Executive of the Department of Corrections [pdf, 545 KB]

   ...unjustifiably dismissed, reinstatement is neither practicable nor reasonable, and that any remedies should be reduced for contribution. Issues [4] The issues for the Court are set out below. (a) Was AJY unjustifiably disadvantaged by Corrections’ responses or failure to respond to the complaint AJY raised on 20 September 2017? (b) Was AJY unjustifiably disadvantaged by the decision to move them from the Gatehouse on or about 6 November 2017 and by the way it was carried out?...

2. [2010] NZEmpC 142 Wang v Hamilton Multicultural Services Trust [pdf, 75 KB]

   ...Finally, he seeks an order for costs. Factual discussion [12] Mr Wang called Mr David Vincent as a witness in support of his claim. Mr Vincent presently works as a network facilitator. From 2002 until 2007 he was the manager of the Trust and was responsible to the Board for all of its operations. He confirmed that during the time he held this position Mr Wang was employed in various roles, which developed in complexity as the organisation grew. He stated that because of the...

3. Slinger v Zhou [2015] NZIACDT 38 (15 April 2015) [pdf, 242 KB]

   ...to immigration matters led to his being struck off the roll of barristers and solicitors and, more recently, his conviction for offences committed in RMI resulting in a sentence of imprisonment. [26] I refer to these matters, as one of Ms Zhou’s responses to the complaint is that Mr Martin misled her and, in some respects, she could not be responsible for failing to apprehend that at the time. [27] The Tribunal does accept Mr Martin was dishonest and skilled at manipulation, and will...

4. IK v VR LCRO 227/2014 (21 December 2015) [pdf, 102 KB]

   ...documents she had given them, together with her file. She revoked the authority to act signed in favour of Mr AW/[Law Firm A] and asked for the return of her deposit less reasonable fees, and a detailed settlement statement. [11] This triggered a response from Mr IK dated 27 May in which he indicated that he felt unable to return her documents as he considered that they may involve evidence of “criminal and/or immigration fraud”, and he needed time to reflect on the ethical conun...

5. Puna - Rotopounamu 1B3A2C (2018) 70 Tākitimu MB 143 (70 TKT 143) [pdf, 574 KB]

   ...Then in March 2018 Mr Hemana sought directions regarding the conduct of his fellow trustees. In short, he requested their removal because he asserted they were compromising the completion of the project, due he claimed, to their inaction, delayed responses and apparent inability to act cohesively. Unless the trustees were removed, or moved to an advisory role, then Mr Hemana contended that the project was at risk of failure. [2] Even when, A1 Homes (Hastings) Ltd, the then builder...

6. [2017] NZEmpC 84 The Chief Executive of the Ministry of Social Development v Tuilaepa [pdf, 205 KB]

   ...one corner to another corner near the doorway. In this location Mr Tuilaepa was standing above YPA and Ms Siau was attempting to stand between them by straddling YPA. She called to another youth worker, Mr Regino Antonio, to summon the Response Team. She told Mr Tuilaepa to stop what he was doing. [12] During the struggle near the doorway the hood on Mr Tuilaepa’s sweatshirt either moved up over his head or was pulled there by YPA. In that position the hood obscured th...

7. [2019] NZEmpC 46 Southern District Health Board v Glasson [pdf, 457 KB]

   ...Glasson’s career followed the resignation of a manager in January 1996. That triggered reallocation of certain responsibilities and duties in her department. In a letter dated 15 January 1996 the DHB advised Ms Glasson that she would carry “sole responsibility for the cardiac ultrasound section”. She was to take over supervision of cardiac ultrasound and was responsible for deciding which studies needed external review. She was also responsible for staff training. The lette...

8. Canterbury Westland Standards Committee 1 v Allan [2019] NZLCDT 25 [pdf, 351 KB]

   ...regarded Ms O’s confirming instructions as a withdrawal of her complaint; (b) He was not made aware of Ms O’s second complaint of April 2018 until 12 June 2018. (c) He attended the Standards Committee meeting on 4 July 2018, provided a written response to that meeting, and discussed the complaints. He accepted that the Standards Committee regarded that as an insufficient response and that he could have made a more substantial response had he been aware of the extent of his...

9. 16.-Evidence-of-Mr-Keith-Hamill-Water-Quality64013659.1.PDF [PDF, 1.1 MB]

   ....................................................................................................... 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................ 2 WORK SINCE LODGEMENT ................................................................................. 6 Response to section 92 requests for further information ...................................... 9 COMMENTS ON SUBMISSIONS ...........................................................

10. LCRO 57/2021 FC v HS, FM and QP (8 September 2023) [pdf, 224 KB]

    ...application had not yet been heard. [15] Under s 161(1) of the Act, a lawyer is precluded from proceeding with debt recovery action against a client once a complaint is made about the fees charged by the lawyer to that client. The complaint and response [16] Ms FC expressed her complaint to be “primarily regarding fees charged to me by [Law firm A] … but it also relates to the conduct of lawyers who worked at [Law firm A]”.1 Ms FC “structured [the complaint] under four grou...