Search Results

1. [2021] NZEmpC 199 Lawton v Steel Pencil Holdings Ltd [pdf, 415 KB]

   ...directors’ and others’ liability in circumstances where a company is unable to rectify a breach. [33] That the regime created by the 2016 Amendment was more wide-ranging than had previously existed under the then s 234 was recognised by the Court of Appeal in Brill v Labour Inspector.13 The object of Part 9A was also recognised in this Court, saying it was to provide additional measures to promote the more effective enforcement of employment standards, especially minimum entit...

2. WXY v Attorney-General (Strike-Out Application) [2014] NZHRRT 37 [pdf, 59 KB]

   ...NZLR 456 parents of adult disabled children challenged a Ministry of Health policy of excluding family members from payment for various disability support services provided by them to their children. In a decision given on 14 May 2012 the Court of Appeal held that the policy was discriminatory on the ground of family status because parents willing to provide natural disability support for their children were materially disadvantaged because they did not receive payment. [12] The respon...

3. [2022] NZEmpC 199 Urban Décor Ltd v Yu [pdf, 202 KB]

   ...not provided any evidence of their actual costs. In their submissions, they state: “We certify that Urban Decor’s actual costs in both the ERA and this Court exceeds the costs claimed for these respective proceedings.” [25] The Court of Appeal held in Binnie v Pacific Health Ltd that the first step in deciding costs is to assess whether the costs actually incurred by the plaintiff were reasonably incurred.13 I noted recently in New Zealand Post Primary Teachers’ Associa...

4. The Crown - Hereheretau B2M (2008) 124 Wairoa MB 119 (124 WR 119) [pdf, 197 KB]

   ...Huka tfie remail1ing . portion of my share in Hereheretau Number 2 Beach Reserve also the whole of my share in Hereheretau Number 2 B6 - the place of my residence - ALL my share in Hereheretau Number 2 Block (the Hereheretau Block at present under appeal and not subdivided) ALL my share in the Ngamotu Block ALSO all or any unascertained or undefined interests in any other lands whatsoever I ALSO give to Materoa Huka all my personal property and effects whatsoever kind including " [...

5. Abernethy v Coughlan [pdf, 29 KB]

   SUMMARY Case: Abernethy & Anor v Coughlan & Ors File No: TRI 2009-100-000022/ DBH 01666 Court: WHT Adjudicator: RM Carter Date of Decision: 26 August 2009 Background The claimants, Mr and Mrs Abernethy, own a townhouse that was built in 1994 and they purchased it in 2003. The house is suffering damage from leaks and needs to be reclad. The claimants therefore sought $334,846.10 from all respondents. Summary of Facts Mr Coughlan, Mr Humphrey and 2 other people,

6. ENVC Matiatia party corresp costs Direction Matiatia Ltd 201601 [pdf, 316 KB]

   ...4 ought to have been on notice that this degree of engagement (and its associated costs) would necessarily follow from proceeding by way of direct referral (in contrast to a ‘two-step’ hearing process): any decision was final save for an appeal on a point of law. (c) Contrary to what might be expected with a direct referred application, WML approached its application in an iterative and ill- conceived fashion: (i) It first applied to undertake a reclamation for car parking...

7. CAC20005 v Cui [2015] NZREADT 23 [pdf, 173 KB]

   ...proceedings. The fine and costs are to be paid to the Registrar of the Authority at Wellington within 20 working days from the date of this decision. [26] Pursuant to s.113 of the Act, we record that any person affected by this decision may appeal against it to the High Court by virtue of s.116 of the Act. ______________________________ Judge P F Barber Chairperson ______________________________ Mr J Gaukrodger Member ______________________________ M...

8. BB & AB v CC LCRO 134/2012 (26 August 2015) [pdf, 47 KB]

   ...has broad powers to conduct her own investigations, including the power to exercise for that purpose all the powers of a standards committee or an investigator, and seek and receive evidence. The statutory power of review is much broader than an appeal, and gives the LCRO discretion as to the approach to be taken on any particular review and the extent of the investigations necessary to conduct that review. Review hearing [17] Ms and Mr AB attended a review hearing in Auckland on...

9. Bacic v Tulip Holdings Limited (in liq) [pdf, 26 KB]

   SUMMARY Case: Bacic & Anor v Tulip Holdings Ltd (in liq) & Ors File No: TRI 2008-100-000046/ DBH 00606 Court: WHT Adjudicator: P McConnell Date of Decision: 11 June 2009 Background The claimants, Mr and Mrs Bacic, experienced problems with their new home from the day they moved in. Some remedial work has been carried out but the majority is yet to be done. The first, fifth and ninth respondents were removed during the proceedings and so the claimants sought $275,5

10. Hawkes Bay Standards Committee v McKay [2014] NZLCDT 57 [pdf, 173 KB]

    ...were not heard for almost two and a half years from their inception. This was not simply by mounting a straightforward defence but by engaging in a series of interlocutory applications which were found to be without merit and pursuing them on appeal as far as he was able. [15] Furthermore his manner of defence involved an attack on the honesty and integrity of his client. He blamed her for what he saw as his own misfortune in facing charges with no insight whatsoever as to his con...