Search Results

1. IACDT - Statement of Reply form [pdf, 77 KB]

   ...Immigration Advisers Complaints and Disciplinary Tribunal For more information visit www.justice.govt.nz/tribunals IACDT Number___________________________ Which party are you? (Please tick one) □ Complainant □ Immigration Adviser Statement of Reply A When to use this form Use this form if you disagree with anything in a Statement of Complaint that the Immigration Advisers Authority has referred to the Tribunal and you are either: • The adviser who is the subject...

2. [2014] NZEmpC 100 George v Auckland Council ARC 12410 Auckland Council v George costs [pdf, 191 KB]

   ...Clause 6 of Ms George’s employment agreement provided that: The [Council] shall indemnify the employee from and against all actions, claims, proceedings, costs and damages incurred or awarded in respect of or arising out of any act or omission or statement by the employee in the course of employment, provided that the indemnity shall not be available for wilful loss, or damage caused by the employee or where the loss or damage is the result of misconduct or an unlawful activity....

3. [2022] NZEmpC 30 Cousens v Star Nelson Holdings Ltd [pdf, 210 KB]

   ...comply with a compliance order made under section 137, the court may do 1 or more of the following things: (a) if the person in default is a plaintiff, order that the proceedings be stayed or dismissed as to the whole or any part of the relief claimed by the plaintiff in the proceedings: (b) if the person in default is a defendant, order that the defendant’s defence be struck out and that judgment be sealed accordingly: (c) order that the person in default be sentenced to i...

4. Jessup v Accident Compensation Corporation (Leave to appeal to the High Court) [2023] NZACC 70 [pdf, 252 KB]

   ...Compensation Act 2001(the Act) and case law being the judgments of the Court of Appeal in Estate of Priddle,1 the High Court in Hastings,2 and the District Court in Monk.3 [6] His Honour held that: … However, it is well established in case-law that a claimant must prove, on the balance of probabilities, both requirements under section 30(3), that is, a Schedule 2 disease and workplace exposure. A mere assertion, or some evidence, that these two requirements are met, does not suf...

5. [2007] NZEmpC WC 10B/07 Smith & Anor v Harvey [pdf, 53 KB]

   ...relied on in the hearing of the challenge. [22] The challenge will be heard by way of submissions as to law and fact based on those documents. [5] I was provided by the parties with an agreed bundle of documentation. This included the written statements of Mr Harvey and his wife which were confirmed on oath before the Authority. It appears that the Authority tested this evidence in the course of its investigation. In recording that it accepted it, The Authority noted that i...

6. [2021] NZEmpC 137 Coetzee v Oamaru Meats Ltd [pdf, 280 KB]

   ...Coetzee lodged a claim in the Employment Relations Authority alleging that he had been unjustifiably dismissed and/or disadvantaged during the company’s redundancy process that he believed was predetermined and breached the duty of good faith. He claimed to have been coerced and/or misled into signing the settlement agreement. As relief he sought the ability to pursue the personal grievance previously raised with the company before the settlement agreement was signed. [4] Th...

7. [2011] NZEmpC 57 Wade v Hume Pack-N-Cool Ltd [pdf, 113 KB]

   ...respondent did not make a claim for costs. At that stage the Employment Relations Authority had awarded $1,500 costs against the applicant. This sum had not been paid. Mr Hume’s affidavit complains about the way the applicant has pursued his claims, and in particular the delays and the additional costs that were being incurred. [10] On 28 April 2010, a notice of change of representation and address for service on behalf of the applicant was filed stating that his counsel was n...

8. Rafiq v Commissioner of Inland Revenue [2012] NZHRRT 12 [pdf, 106 KB]

   ...(HRRT 032/2011). The circumstances in which the venue was changed to Wellington included the following: [3.1] Mr Rafiq refused to participate in pre-hearing teleconferences, insisting that all communications “be done by post only”. See the statement of claim dated 30 August 2011. This made dialogue difficult. [3.2] When by Minute issued on 18 October 2011 a direction was made that these proceedings be heard at Auckland on 10 February 2012, Mr Rafiq was directed to file his brief...

9. [2017] NZEmpC 97 Nel v ASB Bank [pdf, 216 KB]

   ...when he was dismissed for serious misconduct. 1 Nel v ASB Bank Ltd [2017] NZEmpC 56. [3] The first issue is whether the pleading as to disparity of treatment in Mr Nel’s statement of claim (EMPC 257/2016) should be struck out. For ASB Bank Ltd (ASB), Mr Dench argues that as currently pleaded the examples of disparity fall outside the scope of the applicable legal tests. For Mr Nel, Ms Stewart argues that having regar...

10. Regulatory Impact Statement on the Canterbury Earthquakes Insurance Tribunal 30 January 2018 [pdf, 296 KB]

    Regulatory Impact Statement on the Canterbury Earthquakes Insurance Tribunal Minister of Justice 30 January 2018 Approved by: Ruth Fairhall, GM CJSP File number: CRT-48-01 Purpose 1. This note provides information on the attached Regulatory Impact Statement, which sets out our analysis of this proposal. It will accompany the Cabinet paper when it is considered by Cabinet, and will be published when the Bill is introduced to the House. 2. The RIS is a departmental docum...