Search Results

1. Manahi v The Māori Trustee – Kapenga A5 (2018) 184 Waiariki MB 168 (184 WAR 168-180) [pdf, 304 KB]

   ...result, the Court must decline a recall for the purpose of seeking orders under those sections. In reliance on Henderson v Henderson counsel says that the 10 Snowdon v Radio New Zealand Ltd [2013] NZEmpC 91 at [7]. 184 Waiariki MB 177 Court would have to disallow any new arguments if it recalled the application therefore making it futile for the Court to grant the recall application.11 [42] In summary, Mr Bidois submits tha...

2. LCRO 9/2024 & 12/2024 QB v WF and SY & WF and SY v QB (27 June 2024) [pdf, 1.3 MB]

   ...professional conduct. The former is essentially a compensatory process premised on rules of evidence and reasonably strict principles of causation 14 GFW Agri-Products Ltd v Gibson [1995] 2 ERNZ 323 (CA). 15 Farmer Motor Group Ltd v McKenzie [2017] NZEmpC 98. 16 Ioan v Scott Technology NZ Ltd [2019] NZCA 386. 27 and measure of loss. The latter is a disciplinary process to fulfil the statutory purposes of maintaining confidence in the provision of legal services, protecting consu...

3. Hammond v Credit Union Baywide [2015] NZHRRT 6 [pdf, 265 KB]

   ...straightforward process. The facts do not call for observations to be made about the application of those principles in the context of social networking sites. Contrast Senior v Police [2013] NZFLR 356 (HC) and Hook v Stream Group (NZ) Pty Ltd [2013] NZEmpC 188 at [29] to [37]. A further point to be made is that the manner in which the case has been framed by the parties has made it unnecessary for the Tribunal to consider the possible application of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act...