Search Results

1. Theobald v Coulter [pdf, 170 KB]

   ...Building Consent and identified themselves as being the “builders” on the application form. They subcontracted most of the work to different tradespeople, and the carpentry and concrete work were all done on labour only. The Coulters were responsible for supplying the materials, and co-ordinating and managing the construction process. 8.1.10 By and large I prefer the submissions made by the Owners on this issue. Whilst the Coulters did little of the physical construction...

2. LCRO 369/2013 WS v AD (29 August 2017) [pdf, 334 KB]

   ...Mr WS believed that in previous years the law firm had been paying 100% of the outgoings associated with its premises. [58] Mr WS alleged that Mr AD lied to the Disputes Tribunal when he said that he had not altered his law firm’s lease. Responses by Mr AD [59] Mr AD provided responses to most, but not all, of the material sent by Mr WS to the Complaints Service. [60] In all of his responses Mr AD rejected the various allegations made by Mr WS. Company T [61] Mr AD’s pos...

3. [2020] NZEnvC 018 Taranaki Energy Watch Incorporated v South Taranaki District Council [pdf, 5.4 MB]

   ...subject to its determination on scope. Topic A - The risk of human fatality attendant upon either a fire or an explosion Introduction [5] At the end of the hearing in August 2018, the District Council and PEPANZ had sh ifted their positions in response to expert evidence that sensitive activities would be exposed to an unacceptable level of risk if they were located within an individual fatality risk contour of 1 x 10-5 per year. 1 We record again that we have focused on fatal ity...

4. Julian v Inia - Succession to Moehuarahi Te Ruuri (2024) 309 Waiariki MB 197 (309 WAR 197) [pdf, 459 KB]

   ...right expressed by Tā Hirini Moko Mead. An imbalance would be created, which is to be avoided in a Māori context. [71] The key goal in any discussion about the future of whenua Māori would be to achieve a consensus, as to who may carry on the responsibilities to the land in the future.46 In the absence of consensus, all uri should be given the ability to enjoy the tikanga responsibilities and rights imposed by whenua Māori at some point in their lives. The norms of responsibi...

5. [2007] NZEmpC 6A/07 Otago Taxis Ltd v Strong [pdf, 96 KB]

   ...also accepted that she had sued the wrong person in the Authority, but on the understanding that Ms Ritchie was her employer. She was also cross-examined at some length about the timesheets and her claim for lieu days but I did not find that her responses to these peripheral issues undermined her credibility. On the key issue of what was said on the night of 12 January, she remained unshaken. She also confirmed, as had Mr Gow in his evidence-in-chief, that nothing was said about...

6. [2011] NZEmpC 96 Snowdon v Radio New Zealand Ltd [pdf, 177 KB]

   ...stated: 18. It is my opinion that Ms Snowdon is not medically fit to give evidence at the hearing on 1 August 2011. Her current state of mental health precludes this. 19. Whilst I accept there is a legal process underway, my professional responsibility is to the health of my patient and her well being. This affidavit should be read this way. [36] Dr Sawrey concluded that further psychiatric assessment was not required at this time as the plaintiff had suffered from PTSD...

7. [2008] NZEmpC CC 9/08 Coffey v The Christchurch Press, a division of Fairfax NZ Ltd [pdf, 70 KB]

   ...Thompson issued Mr Coffey with a written warning. This recorded Mr Lammers’s concerns that Mr Coffey had been dismissive, abusive and aggressive towards him, that they had discussed this in a meeting with Mr Coffey who had apologised for his response to Mr Lammers when the latter rang him at home. Mr Thompson is recorded as having stated that Mr Coffey had the right to express any legitimate concerns but it was not acceptable for him to be verbally abusive to his supervisor. T...

8. [2013] NZEmpC 39 Rittson-Thomas t/a Totara Hills Farm v Davidson [pdf, 150 KB]

   ...at least is open for anybody to do in any event) is not the same as an offer of the position and, given its significant reduction status and remuneration, I find that Mr Davidson’s rejection of that opportunity as demeaning, to be a reasonable response in all the circumstances. [12] Mr Davidson obtained replacement employment within a couple of weeks of his dismissal but this did not start until about 7 January 2011. Although Mr Rittson- Thomas is critical of Mr Davidson for not m...

9. [2015] NZEmpC 186 The Commissioner of Salford School v Campbell [pdf, 299 KB]

   ...considerations mean that a cost benefit analysis of litigation of this sort cannot be confined solely to economic considerations. Nonetheless, we think that a more sensible approach by the defendants to the making of Calderbank offers and steely responses by the Courts where plaintiffs do not beat Calderbank offers would be in the broader public interest. [16] This theme was developed by the same Court in Bluestar Print Group (NZ) Limited v Mitchell, when it stated: 14 [19] We...

10. LCRO 276/2013+293/2013+242/2016 CS v VN, PR and ZW ZM v VC [pdf, 274 KB]

    ...the District Courts Rules and s 161 of the Act. [46] It is also relevant to note that Mr CS had not been prepared to argue in his own defence when he attended Court on the appeal, and was allowed an overnight adjournment so he could prepare his response to the concerns raised by [High Court Judge] about r 13.5.3. [47] It can reasonably be assumed that Mr CS attended the appeal prepared to argue the relevant law that was determinative of the appeal, i.e. the interplay between the...