3969 items matching your search terms
...2020 DECISION OF TRIBUNAL ON COSTS APPLICATION BY PLAINTIFF1 1 [This decision is to be cited as: O’Hagan v Police (Costs) [2020] NZHRRT 28. Note publication restrictions.] IN THE HUMAN RIGHTS REVIEW TRIBUNAL [2020] NZHRRT 28 I TE TARAIPIUNARA MANA TANGATA 2 BACKGROUND [1] In these proceedings Mr O’Hagan alleged the Police did not respond to his IPP 6 request within the 20 working day timeframe allowed by...
...this case. [11] In the early days of his employment with ISL, in mid-May 2008, Mr Clark arranged for the publication of advertisements for casual/relief Community Service Worker (CSW) staff. These came to the notice of ISL’s National Human Resources Manager, Scott Gwynn, who communicated with Mr Clark by email expressing his “serious concerns about the detail and grammatical content of the advertisement” and asking that it be withdrawn from publication and not repea...
...to LSG. During the hearing of ARC 19/11, the defendant produced evidence which Mr Pollak submitted showed that most of the transferring employees from Pacific to LSG had their wages, outstanding leave and other entitlements inflated. LSG’s Human Resources Manager, Marie Park, gave evidence at the hearing before the Employment Court in ARC 19/11 and has provided affidavits in support of the present application by LSG. [10] Mr Pollak submitted that Mr Matsuoka is claiming, in ter...
...into such an agreement. (See explanatory note pages 3-4.) This assessment is also consistent with the decision of the Court of Appeal in New Zealand Maori Council v Attorney-General [2008] 1 NZLR 318. 8.2 I also note the view of the United Nations Human Rights Committee that the exclusion of judicial review under the Fisheries Settlement, in the context of a negotiated settlement, was consistent with the right of access to the courts under art 14(1) of the International Covenant on Civil...
...turn our minds to the criteria when considering the consistency of the Bill with the Bill of Rights Act. 11. Section 19(1) of the Bill of Rights Act affirms the right to freedom from discrimination on the prohibited grounds listed in s 21 of the Human Rights Act 1993 (HRA). 12. Discrimination under s 19 of the Bill of Rights Act arises where:4 a. there is differential treatment or effects as between persons or groups in analogous or comparable situations on the basis of a prohibited...
1 IN THE HUMAN RIGHTS REVIEW TRIBUNAL [2018] NZHRRT 4 Reference No. HRRT 072/2015 BETWEEN KATHY APOSTOLAKIS Plaintiff AND ATTORNEY-GENERAL Defendant Reference No. HRRT 078/2016 BETWEEN KATHY APOSTOLAKIS Plaintiff AND ATTORNEY-GENERAL Defendant AT WELLINGTON BEFORE: Mr RPG Haines QC, Chairperson Ms GJ Goodwin, Member Mr BK Neeson JP, Member REPRESENTATION: Mrs K Apostolakis in person DATE...
...4521478_BORA VET LETTER (002) 9. To the extent the exclusion of subsequent challenge could be said to limit a claimant's minority rights under s 20 of the Bill of Rights Act, this would be justified on the same basis. 10. The United Nations Human Rights Committee upheld a similar exclusion under the 1992 Fisheries Settlement. The Committee found the exclusion was consistent with arts 14 and 27 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which are comparable to ss...
Reference No. HRRT 023/2018 UNDER THE HUMAN RIGHTS ACT 1993 BETWEEN AN LI TAO PLAINTIFF AND BODY CORPORATE 198693 FIRST DEFENDANT AND STRATA TITLE ADMINISTRATION LTD SECOND DEFENDANT AT AUCKLAND BEFORE: Ms GJ Goodwin, Deputy Chairperson Ms B Klippel, Member Dr M Koloamatangi, Member REPRESENTATION: Ms AL Tao in person Mr E St John and Mr S Maloney for defendants DATE OF HEARING: DATE OF DECISION: 31 August and 1 September 2023 16 November 2023 DECISION...
...for pursuing Māori collective litigation, such as the Waitangi Tribunal, the Law Commission do not envision an increase in class actions in this area. However, they note that individual Māori plaintiffs could still benefit from using the system. Human rights 33 Approval of the attached Government response has no direct human rights implications. There are existing procedures for bringing group litigation under the Human Rights Act 1993.1 Gender implications 34 Approval of the Go...
...from a paddock in which car wrecks were stored. The gate and surrounding fences were tidy and secure, and the cattle had not lifted the gate or pushed through it. The escape therefore did not occur as a result of poor fences but as a result of human error. That error was made either by ZZM or by a visitor to his property who was looking at the wrecks in the paddock. If ZZM had left the gate open, he would be liable. If a third party did so, ZZM disputes that he should be liable....