Search Results

1. [2011] NZEmpC 95 Walker v Procare Health Ltd [pdf, 113 KB]

   ...who, at one stage, had acted as mediator in relation to the dispute. Section 148 of the Act imposes strict obligations of confidentiality on persons providing mediation services and those obligations were recognised and enforced by the Court of Appeal in Just Hotel Ltd v Jesudhass. 10 Section 148(2) specifically provides: (2) No person who provides mediation services may give evidence in any proceedings, whether under this Act or any other Act, about – (a) the provision o...

2. Hooker v Director-General of the Department of Conservation (2012) 38 Taitokerau MB 219 (38 TTK 219) [pdf, 179 KB]

   ...and vindication of a plaintiff’s possessory right: Mayfair Ltd v Pears.8 [17] In TCN Channel Nine Pty Ltd v Anning an award of $25,000 in a case concerning an intrusion on to land to obtain a television interview. The New South Wales Court of Appeal in that case found: 9 The hurt to feelings, humiliation and affront to dignity experienced by the respondent was aggravated by the way in which the appellant acted in the course of its trespass. It confronted the respondent with c...

3. [2015] NZEmpC 58 Hoff v The Wood Lifecare (2007) Limited Industries [pdf, 177 KB]

   ...Court must order the employer to pay the lesser of a sum equal to the lost remuneration or to three months' ordinary time remuneration. Under s 128(3) the Court has a discretion to order an employer to pay a greater sum but, as the Court of Appeal made clear in Sam's Fukuyama Food Services Ltd v Zhang, 11 moderation is required in fixing awards for lost remuneration and any such award must have regard to the individual circumstances of the particular case. [75] I consid...

4. CAC20005 v Morton-Jones [2015] NZREADT 71 [pdf, 141 KB]

   ...internal controls and conduct internal checks and audits in real estate firms; and US26152 – Explain the principles of ethics applying to real estate practice. [39] 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 G Denley Member ______________________________...

5. Cavanagh v Nassiep [2012] NZIACDT 38 (31 July 2012) [pdf, 108 KB]

   ...practice. The letter suggested Mr Cavanagh simply needed to wait for Immigration New Zealand to process his application. The letter also had handwritten notes saying points had not been awarded for Mr Cavanagh being a diesel mechanic, and he should appeal. However, Ms Nassiep could not assist as she was not in New Zealand. [20.5] Ms Nassiep sent an email to Immigration New Zealand dated 24 November 2010. It referred to Mr Cavanagh’s qualifications, and said she was leaving New Ze...

6. MG v HJ LCRO 256/2013 (19 December 2014) [pdf, 66 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 Issue [17] The issue on review is whether there is any good reason...

7. White v Franks - Te Komiti 1A1 Ahu Whenua Trust (2018) 167 Taitokerau MB 292 (167 TTK 292) [pdf, 293 KB]

   ...Act 1993 (including the Preamble). [5] I adopt that approach.3 1 126 Taitokerau MB 54-92 (126 TTK 54-92). 2 Taurua v Harawira – Te Tii Waitangi A [2017] Maori Appellate Court MB 328 (2017 APPEAL 328) at [13]. 3 Also see Rameka v Hall [2013] NZCA 203. 167 Taitokerau MB 294 What are the allegations against Ms Nash and Ms Franks? [6] Ms White alleges that Ms Nash and Ms Franks: (a) Bullied and intimidated her and her f...

8. [2022] NZEmpC 36 Kang v Saena Company Ltd [pdf, 231 KB]

   ...incorporated in July 2021. [41] The burden is on the plaintiff to satisfy the Court that there is a prospect that the assets will be removed, dissipated or diminished in value. The test is not unduly exacting. In Murren v Schaeffer the Court of Appeal considered this aspect of the test and commented:12 The second stage requires the Court to be satisfied there is a danger that judgment will not be satisfied because assets may be removed or dealt with in a way that frust...

9. CAC20002 v Daji [2015] NZREADT 14 [pdf, 140 KB]

   ...sentencing indication, but we fine the defendant $2000, to be paid to the Registrar of the Authority at Wellington within 20 working days of this decision. [32] 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 G Denley Member ______________________________ M...

10. LCRO 68/2022 YE v AL (23 May 2023) [pdf, 200 KB]

    ...thereby prompting Mr YE to question where the water was supplied from. 6 Nature and scope of review [35] The High Court has described a review by this Office in the following way:10 A review by the LCRO is neither a judicial review nor an appeal. Those seeking a review of a Committee determination are entitled to a review based on the LCRO’s own opinion rather than on deference to the view of the Committee. A review by the LCRO is informal, inquisitorial and robust. It invol...