7300 items matching your search terms
...[2014] NZDT 566 BETWEEN DG APPLICANT AND YT LIMITED RESPONDENT Date of Order: 19 May 2014 Referee: Referee Robertshawe ORDER OF THE DISPUTES TRIBUNAL The Tribunal hereby orders that the applicants’ claim be dismissed Facts [1] On 23 February 2010, DG’s daughter, BB, collided with a truck whilst performing a u- turn in her parent’s Ford Focus outside her school at lunchtime. [2] BB was responsible for the collision. The total loss...
...JUDGE C M SHAW [1] On behalf of Mr Harland, Mr Brosnahan has applied to have a preliminary question heard before the substantive proceedings on the basis that the preliminary question could be determinative of the entire matter. [2] The statement of claim asks the Court to make findings that: 1. The Commissioner of Police unjustifiably dismissed him by compulsorily determining his employment under s28C of the Police Act 1958; and 2. That he remains a police officer....
...2022 (the Protected Disclosures Act); that YQO was dismissed in retaliation for their disclosure; that they were entitled to be protected from retaliatory action under that Act; and that the dismissal was unjustified. [10] The company filed a statement in reply to the statement of problem, denying the alleged breaches and taking issue with a number of the factual matters referred to in YQO’s statement of problem. [11] YQO subsequently applied to the Authority to have their cla...
...and found he was a credible witness. A then put his complaint into writing. [5] Both Messrs Bartosh and Bellamy, when giving evidence, said that A wrote out his account without any assistance or prompting from them. A’s written statement said that the plaintiff had given him two gram bags of “weed” which was equal to a “tiny (sic)” when he was at the transport centre one day. That allegation, which could not be clarified as to the date, was not pursued any f...
...Court. 7 The first respondent found that the applicant was a party to that unlawful conspiracy and that six other charges associated with the applicant‘s involvement in related transactions were also proved. [9] The applicant‘s amended statement of claim in relation to the Barge litigation charges is inchoate. He does not address the charges individually. Instead, he pleads matters of fact, matters of law, and matters of submission. These pleadings are...
...[1993] 2 NZLR 641 (CA) at 644. 3 Employment Court Regulations 2000, reg 38(1)(b). 4 ASB Bank Ltd v Nel [2017] NZCA 559 at [17]. (c) Copies of timesheets for Mr Sexton from 1 March 2017 to 20 September 2017. (d) Jabroli Trust bank statements that have not been redacted. (e) A GST number for Jabroli Trust. (f) IRD and GST numbers for Mr Lowe. (g) Copies of any receipts for a Site Safe course or for any other induction courses relating to Mr Sexton. (h) Any d...
...O’Sullivan and Mr M Booth for first defendant Mr DS McGill for second defendant Mr I Millard QC and Mr B Cullen for third and fourth defendants DATE OF HEARING: Heard on the papers DATE OF DECISION: 11 May 2018 DECISION OF TRIBUNAL STRIKING OUT STATEMENT OF CLAIM1 1 [This decision is to be cited as: Kapiarumala v New Zealand Catholic Bishops Conference (Strike-Out Application) [2018] NZHRRT 18] 2 The claim [1] The...
...(Definition of Marriage) Amendment Act 2013 (MDMA Act). While several amendments have been made to the Adoption Act since its enactment, those changes have been piecemeal, without a fundamental re-appraisal of its underlying assumptions and without a clear statement of the Act’s purpose and of the values and interests it is to reflect in the second millennium. [7] In these proceedings under Part 1A of the Human Rights Act 1993 filed on 22 July 2011 Adoption Action Inc (Adoption Actio...
...[42] As outcomes of the review, the applicant sought: (a) “adherence to the [Order] in full, recognizing it as final and binding”; (b) prompt payment of the claimed $3,597.01, in accordance with both the Order and the first respondent’s statement to her that “we will make payment to you today”. 8 Review on the papers [43] This review has been undertaken on the papers pursuant to s 206(2) of the Act, which allows a Legal Complaints Review Officer (LCRO or Review Office...
...Judgment: 31 May 2012 INTERLOCUTORY JUDGMENT OF JUDGE B S TRAVIS [1] The plaintiff (Mr Patel) has filed a memorandum on 14 May 2012 in which he states there has been no cross-challenge issued by the defendant (Pegasus Stations Ltd) against his statement of claim in the statement of defence dated 7 December 2011. He seeks a “hearing in favour of the plaintiff without any direction conference and without delay”. [2] Although it does not include a cross-challenge, the sta...