Search Results

1. Singla v IAA [2018] NZIACDT 15 (8 June 2018) [pdf, 191 KB]

   ...coherent and consistent evidential basis for the complaint. The appellant’s most specific element in his final position, was presented when he replied to the Registrar’s response to this appeal. He focused on an alleged failure of the Adviser to request a reconsideration of Immigration New Zealand’s decision to decline an application for a work visa. Immigration New Zealand’s letter contained a standard notification of the right to apply for reconsideration, and the criter...

2. [2011] NZEmpC 20 Miller v Fonterra Co-operative Group Ltd [pdf, 81 KB]

   ...of the evidence of a witness who was very unwell and the arrangements that were made for that evidence to be taken on Tuesday 5 October 2010. That witness sadly passed away on 16 September, but in the plaintiff’s affidavit in support of the application for further and better discovery, sworn on 12 August 2010, Mr Miller annexed an affidavit of that person, Mr Young, which was sworn on 29 May 2008. [2] Mr Rooney, counsel for the defendant, has indicated that objection will be...

3. IG, JX, KX c/-XG Trust v SI [2018] NZDT 1482 (27 August 2018) [pdf, 151 KB]

   CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 5 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2018] NZDT 1482 APPLICANT IG C/- XG Trust APPLICANT JX C/- XG Trust APPLICANT KX C/- XG Trust RESPONDENT SI The Tribunal hereby orders: IG, JX and KX as trustees of the XG Trust are to pay the sum of $15,000.00 to SI on or before Monday 10 September 2018. Reasons: 1. The trustees of the

4. [2009] NZEmpC WC 3/09 Mana Coach Service Ltd V The Tramways Union [pdf, 18 KB]

   ...of $1,500 towards its legal costs in opposing the plaintiff’s claim for costs. As to the union’s claim for costs on the challenge, it has been made well beyond the 2-month period allowed for doing so and although an extension of time is now requested, no reasons for the delay have been provided as are expected in such circumstances. That claim strikes me as a makeweight and tactical, and is refused. [5] I deal first with the question of costs in the Employment Relations Authori...

5. EF v G Ltd NZDT [2021] 1530 (24 February 2021) [pdf, 229 KB]

   CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 7 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2021] NZDT 1530 APPLICANT / COUNTERCLAIM RESPONDENT EF RESPONDENT / COUNTERCLAIM APPLICANT G Ltd The Tribunal orders: 1. EF is not liable to G Ltd for the sum of $1,846.39. 2. The counterclaim by G Ltd dismissed. Reasons: 1. EF entered a contract with G Ltd for completion of an online course to become a personal...

6. [2015] NZEmpC 127 Nisha v LSG Sky Chefs New Zealand Ltd [pdf, 333 KB]

   ...and/or irrelevant. The next ground is: “The defendant is not entitled to claim litigation privilege in relation to particular documents detailed in the Schedule”. Next, the plaintiff says that the documents in respect of which privilege is claimed “are not properly described”. Penultimately, the plaintiff says that the defendant has waived privilege in particular documents listed in the schedule. Finally, the plaintiff says that the information contained in those document...

7. [2017] NZEmpC 30 Lumsden v Skycity Management Ltd [pdf, 222 KB]

   ...Mediation was subsequently arranged for 25 November 2014. [5] Before mediation took place an incident occurred involving a confrontation between Mr Lumsden and a customer. The customer lodged a complaint with Skycity. Mr Lumsden also raised a formal complaint. He believed that another employee had deliberately prompted the customer to provoke an attack on him, and that an emergency button appeared to have been deactivated immediately prior to the incident. By this stage Mr Lum...

8. INZ (Calder) v Ahmed [2019] NZIACDT 18 (2 April 2019) [pdf, 225 KB]

   ...key stages of the process. BACKGROUND [3] Mr Maraj Ahmed is a licensed immigration adviser, based in Pakistan. He is a director of ISAS Consultants (ISAS). [4] The narratives below are not a complete history of each client’s immigration application managed by ISAS. Mr AA [5] ISAS were instructed by Mr AA on behalf of himself and his family, who sought residence in New Zealand. [6] Immigration New Zealand sent a letter addressed to Mr AA, courtesy of Mr Ahmed, by email o...

9. JT & JB Ltd v SN [2021] NZDT 1582 (16 July 2021) [pdf, 197 KB]

   CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL District Court [2021] NZDT 1582 APPLICANT in the claim JT RESPONDENT in the claim SN APPLICANT in the counterclaim BI INSURER of the APPLICANT' in the claim JB Ltd The Tribunal orders: SN is to pay $5,806.50 to JB Limited by 7 August 2021 or by payments if JB Limited agrees. Background 1. On 21 February 202...

10. B v Southern Response Earthquake Services Ltd [2021] CEIT-2021-0006 [pdf, 336 KB]

    ...with foundation sub- contractors directly. 15) On 15 December 2016, another of Mr Bs’ lawyers, Corbin Child, provided architect’s drawings and details of a rammed aggregate pier foundation design system prepared by S. He repeated Mr Moss’ request for information. 16) On 16 December 2016, Southern Response’s lawyers wrote to Mr Moss and Mr Child and advised of the calculations of the settlement funds, that Southern Response would not be involved in the rebuild, apart from t...