Search Results

1. IN & SC v B Ltd [2020] NZDT 1640 (16 November 2020) [pdf, 169 KB]

   ...2012. The parties realised they were in dispute about the levies before settlement. B Ltd sent a settlement notice on 30 October 2012 forcing IN to settle on its terms. At the point at which IN settled the transaction on those terms, he became responsible for the outstanding levies on Unit 1A. This is the act upon which the claim is based. CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 2 of 8 7. IN therefore had until 30 November 2018 to file his claim, this date being six years after settleme...

2. LCRO 176/2021 BR v UE and VJ (7 December 2022) [pdf, 223 KB]

   ...foundation grounded in any evidence or cogent reasoning against the authorities cited to the Committee.” 6 At [22]. 7 At [23]. 8 FT submissions (18 February 2022) at [9]. 9 At [18]. 10 At [18]. 11 At [20]. 12 At [28]. 4 Submissions in response [20] “The respondents do not accept in any aspect of the Applicant’s description of the facts … as a fair and accurate description of a complex, acrimonious and multi- faceted dispute.” They say that the relevant issue...

3. [2023] NZIACDT 13 - OT v Ramos (24 April 2023) [pdf, 174 KB]

   ...her role in failing to make the online application) to the attention of Immigration NZ that somehow it might work out. The Tribunal also agrees with Mr Moses that there was no coverup here. Ms Ramos had readily admitted to the complainant her responsibility for missing the deadline. [73] The 10th head is dismissed. OUTCOME [74] The first, third and sixth heads of complaint are upheld. Ms Ramos has breached cls 1, 18(a) and 26(c) of the Code. The balance of the complaint is d...

4. OIA-102320.pdf [pdf, 9 MB]

   ...the refresh the Ministry has an opportunity to engage with its employees and People Networks, including the Rainbow Network, on what is important to inform the strategy, and initiatives and actions to achieve the strategy. Please note that this response, with your personal details removed, may be published on the Ministry website at: justice.govt.nz/about/official-information-act-requests/oia-responses/. 1 Papa Poumanu is Te Kawa Mataaho Public Service Commission work programme t...

5. [2022] NZACC 34 – Smith v ACC (10 March 2022) [pdf, 269 KB]

   ...an adjustment disorder. Dr Watson’s description of the causal link between the physical injury and the mental injury was: “Disputes with ACC regarding cover/compensation have and are contributing to anxiety plus adjustment disorder”. In response to the question asking for details of any other medical practitioner or specialist the claimant had been referred to for treatment for the injury, the response was, “Nil of note regarding mental injury”. [18] On 4 December 2017,...

6. Sax v Commissioner of Police (Strike-Out – Privacy) [2022] NZHRRT 34 [pdf, 247 KB]

   ...that these proceedings must be continued and completed under the 2020 Act. However, that does not alter the relevant legal rights and obligations in force at the time the actions subject to this claim were taken. BACKGROUND Filing of claim and response [8] The alleged privacy breaches largely relate to actions by Police in 2011 and the earlier part of 2012. Ms Sax complains that personal information held by Police was inaccurate and that the failure of Police to correct that info...

7. Logan v Logan - Patangata 2F Section 2B [2022] Māori Appellate Court MB 234 (2022 APPEAL 234) [pdf, 286 KB]

   ...r 8.8 to provide sufficient detail of the basis of the appeal is founded on the fundamental premise that the court, and affected parties, should understand the nature of the proceeding in advance. This allows an affected party to prepare their response in advance rather than being ambushed at the hearing. The importance of advance notice is also recognised in the principles of natural justice. [20] There may be circumstances where it is appropriate to excuse compliance with r 8.8...

8. [2021] NZACC 159 – Hawkins v ACC (12 October 2021) [pdf, 184 KB]

   ...the time of her original shoulder/neck injury on 29 July 2006, Mrs Hawkins and her husband were working directors and shareholder employees of Southern Homes Ltd, which provided house construction and building services. Mrs Hawkins was primarily responsible for the administration side of the business and her husband the building work. Each director held 400 shares and a further 400 shares were jointly owned. 6. After injury, Mrs Hawkins returned to work on reduced hours but late...

9. [2024] NZSSAA 01 (30 January 2024) [pdf, 268 KB]

   ...background to the payment and subsequent suspension of XXXX’s Russian pension, confirmed and agreed by the parties.1 5. Prior to April 2022 XXXX’s Russian pension was paid into her New Zealand bank account from Russian bank, SberBank. 6. In response to the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, New Zealand alongside other countries adopted sanctions against Russia via the Russian Sanctions Regulations 2022.2 While these Regulations allow for some payments, such as pe...

10. GL v TT & LT [2022] NZDT 249 (7 December 2022) [pdf, 244 KB]

    ...the existing fence, and that the existing fence needs to be removed and a new fence on the legal boundary between the two properties is required. 4. The Fencing Act 1978 (“the FA”) provides a regime where occupiers of neighbouring land are responsible for sharing the costs of work on an adequate fence. A fence will be adequate for the purposes of the FA if its nature, condition and state of repair is reasonably satisfactory for the purpose that it serves. 5. GL and TT and LT a...