Search Results

1. Tangitu - Parish of Te Puna Lot 154A2 (Epiha Urupā) (2005) 82 Tauranga MB 274 (82 T 274) [pdf, 1.2 MB]

   ...closing submissions once the minutes of the hearing were available. Unfortunately completion of the minutes was delayed, for which the Court must apologise. Submissions for Rapata Leef and certain other owners were filed on the 6th April 2005. A response was filed for Mr Tangitu on the 8th April 2005. The Court received further submissions in reply on behalf of Mr Leef on 82 T 276 the 29th April 2005, and a final reply on behalf of Mr Tangitu was received on the 4th May 2005....

2. [2019] NZEmpC 12 A Labour Inspector v Daleson Investment Ltd [pdf, 376 KB]

   ...request of the Labour Inspector. If they cannot otherwise be agreed, memoranda may be filed, with the Labour Inspector filing and serving within 15 working days; any reply by the defendant within a further 15 working days; anything strictly in response within a further five working days. Christina Inglis Chief Judge Judgment signed at 4 pm on 11 February 2019

3. [2021] NZACC 5 - Andrews v ACC (12 January 2021) [pdf, 214 KB]

   ...reported at the initial emergency department assessment and the clinical notes said, “no sign of head injury”. The emergency department also listed “concussion” under the heading of “treatment”. [20] The branch medical advisor response of Dr Gresson dated 22 April 2013 reflected an assessment that the appellant’s then current symptoms were not due to concussion and that the conclusions in Dr Hartshorn’s earlier report remain valid. [21] There was limited con...

4. [2020] NZEmpC 60 Noble v Ballooning Canterbury.com Ltd [pdf, 298 KB]

   ...obtain instructions, despite making reasonable attempts to do so. A supporting affidavit confirmed that after BCL’s application for costs had been brought on 9 September 2019, several emails had been sent to Mr Noble seeking instructions, but no response had been forthcoming. [8] On 23 October 2019, an affidavit was filed on behalf of GRL stating the application for withdrawal had been served by email. The lawyers also sent a notice to Mr Noble which stated that were the Court...

5. Li & Gao v Real Estate Agents Authority (CAC 408) & Ors [2017] NZREADT 9 [pdf, 259 KB]

   ...cement, which is not usually associated with leaky buildings. It was submitted that for that reason, no alarm bells would have rung if Ms Riley had inspected it. The utility of that evidence is considerably lessened by Ms Riley’s statement in response to a question from the Tribunal that she could not tell, when she looks at a “flat sheet cladding”, what kind of “flat sheet cladding” it is. That is, in the present case, Ms Riley would not have known whether the cladding...

6. LCRO 189/2019 RT v AC (30 November 2020) [pdf, 248 KB]

   ...Committee determined to take no further action with regard to this complaint. Rules 3.1 and 12 – Conduct and Client Care Rules8 [38] At paragraphs [31] and [34] of its determination the Committee said: Mr RT says that he was conscious of his responsibility arising from the unconditional and irrevocable authority given by Mr and Mrs AC to complete the sale, and the undertakings given to complete the sale and to fulfil the undertaking given to ANZ. He denies that, at any stage,...

7. ORC-Proposed-Plan-Change-1-Dust-suppressants-ande-landfills-6-July-2020.pdf [pdf, 810 KB]

   ...national or industry group codes of practice, or other recognised environmental safety standards with which the operation of the facility will comply, and a description of the means for auditing compliance. 18 Identification of management responsibilities for compliance with resource consents and environmental regulatory requirements. 19 Outline of emergency response procedures and contingency plans including:  Power failure;  Fire; and  Emergency contacts....

8. IPT 2019-20 Annual Report [pdf, 477 KB]

   ...treated in a uniform manner and so that legitimate expectations can be clarified for the benefit of the members and the Ministry. 7 Dispatch of Tribunal Business In terms of sections 220(1)(a) and 223 of the Act, the Chair is responsible for making arrangements to ensure the orderly and expeditious dispatch of business in the Tribunal. Performance Appraisal of Members In 2019/2020, the Chair continued the process of biannual performance appraisal meetings w...

9. [2020] NZREADT 29 – Molloy v Real Estate Agents Authority (9 July 2020) [pdf, 208 KB]

   ...motion” inquiry into Ms Molloy’s conduct. Evidence before the Committee [15] At the conclusion of its investigation, the Committee had before it the following: [a] The letter of complaint from Mr Kearney, dated 12 July 2018. [b] Letters in response, from the appellants’ solicitors, dated 23 August 2018 (to Mr Kearney) and 12 April 2019 (to the Authority’s investigator). The Tribunal notes that the appellants’ solicitors stated that the appellants were available to ma...

10. Director of Human Rights Proceedings v Katui Early Childhood Learning Centre Ltd [2019] NZHRRT 55 [pdf, 193 KB]

    ...resigned from her employment at Katui before becoming aware that MUMA intended to carry out reference checks and required written references. She did so on the understanding that she was being appointed to the Waatea job. Katui, however, is not responsible for this. The injury to feelings Ms Gin-Cowan experienced as a result of the events of 9 February 2015 was for the most part caused by miscommunication between Ms Greening, Ms Gin-Cowan and Ms Rangiheuea. Ms Rangiheuea was unaware of...