Search Results

1. [2014] NZEmpC 103 Hill v Teck Properties Ltd costs [pdf, 68 KB]

   ...set down for hearing but was subsequently vacated. [2] While the substantive proceeding has effectively been brought to an end, the plaintiff seeks reimbursement of the costs he has incurred in this Court. The defendant company did not file a statement of defence or take any other steps in the proceeding but has filed submissions in response to the plaintiff’s costs memoranda. [3] It is necessary to understand the background to this matter to put the application for full costs...

2. BQ v BC [2024] NZDT 120 (12 March 2024) [pdf, 211 KB]

   ...was either a gift, compensation for him providing a fitness plan to BQ, or his share of money assisting BQ when she worked delivering [food delivery service]. BC has however accepted he owes BQ some money for the car he purchased. 3. BQ has claimed in the Disputes Tribunal to recover the amounts loaned. The issues for the Tribunal to determine are as follows: i. Did BQ give amounts to BC as a loan? ii. If so, what is the amount outstanding? Did BQ give amounts to BC as a lo...

3. NG & OG v JS [2024] NZDT 33 (18 January 2024) [pdf, 151 KB]

   ...party to the contract (B), A is entitled to monetary damages from B in the same manner and to the same extent as if the representation were a term of the contract that has been breached (s35(1)(a) of the CCLA). A representation is broadly defined as a statement of fact made by one contracting party to another, prior to the contract, regarding some existing fact or past event. The Courts have said that although the party to a private sale may have been legally justified in remaining comple...

4. Cooper v Hamilton Pharmacy 2011 Ltd (Strike-Out Application) [2017] NZHRRT 38 [pdf, 439 KB]

   ...Wilson for defendants DATE OF HEARING: Heard on the papers DATE OF DECISION: 2 October 2017 DECISION OF TRIBUNAL ON STRIKE-OUT APPLICATION BY DEFENDANTS1 INTRODUCTION [1] When on 11 November 2016 the defendants filed their statement of reply they simultaneously filed an objection to the Tribunal’s jurisdiction and applied for the claim to 1 [This decision is to be cited as Cooper v Hamilton Pharmacy 2...

5. [2024] NZEmpC 127 Carrington Jade LP v Grant [pdf, 385 KB]

   ...Appearances: W Tan, agent for first and second plaintiffs, and in person as third plaintiff Defendant in person Judgment: 17 July 2024 JUDGMENT OF JUDGE B A CORKILL Introduction [1] Iva Grant was successful with regard to claims which were investigated by the Employment Relations Authority.1 She established that she had been a permanent employee, and not a casual employee, for the first and second plaintiffs at various times; that holiday pay was outstandi...

6. Han v Auckland Council [2012] NZWHT Auckland 19 [pdf, 111 KB]

   ...lowest tender price and concluded that the total cost of the remedial works was $250,012.13 (excluding GST). This figure did not include project management fees, the cost of timber remediation, design fees and Council charges which had been claimed. [15] In their joint memorandum, counsel for the claimants and the Council reached agreement on the cost of the repair work being a total sum of $280,000. Having considered all the quantum evidence that has been provided, I ac...

7. [2023] NZEmpC 201 Reddy v Employment Relations Authority [pdf, 177 KB]

   ...the Hamilton City Council exceed the costs now sought. 2 The last four numbers have been changed to reflect this was not a challenge. [3] Mr Reddy opposes costs being awarded to the Hamilton City Council. He says, first, that the claim of judicial review was against the first respondent, the Employment Relations Authority, not the Hamilton City Council, and second that the Hamilton City Council filed its statement of defence late and without leave. He submits that the...

8. [2018] NZEmpC 120 RPW v H and C [pdf, 231 KB]

   ...the Court hearing on 6 September 2018.1 In the oral judgment, urgency was granted. There was an order extending the interim non-publication order until further order of the Court. A time limit was set so that the defendants were required to file statements of defence to the amended statement of claim in the first set of proceedings and the statement of claim 1 RPW v H [2018] NZEmpC 103. in the new proceedings on or before...

9. Sandy v Khan LCRO 181 / 2009 (25 December 2009) - Decision on orders [pdf, 112 KB]

   ...v Stevens [2009] 2 NZLR 384 (SC). [7] Ms Sandy claims compensation in respect of: [a] The costs incurred in renewing the business lease; 3 [b] The costs of taking out a loan to finance the business being sold; [c] Obtaining financial statement from her accountant; [d] Lost opportunity (of the sale of the business or pursuing the proposed purchaser); [e] The costs of instructing new counsel in an effort to enforce settlement; [f] Damages for inconvenience and stress; [...

10. LCRO 121/2023 AI v HR (12 December 2023) [pdf, 218 KB]

    ...wife misrepresented to the applicant the amount of the proceeds of sale of Property A. The only arguable representations made in the agreement relevant to the issue are those in paragraph K(e), clause 9.1(a) and clause 9.1(b). [96] Each of those statements is a statement of fact made by the parties to the agreement, the applicant and the wife, to each other. If the statement in paragraph K(e) was factually incorrect by overstating the gross proceeds of sale, that is an error made by...