Search Results

1. [2007] NZEmpC CC 18/07 Murphy v Steel & Tube New Zealand Ltd [pdf, 144 KB]

   ...of submissions. Mr Murphy’s personal grievance was raised promptly with the company in a letter dated 19 December 2005 but the remedies sought were not initially specified. It was only in a discussion between Mr Ruscoe and the company’s human resources manager in February 2006 that reinstatement was explicitly mentioned for the first time. By chance, that was a few days after a replacement for Mr Murphy had been recruited. Mr Dorking invited me to conclude from this inform...

2. Review of the Foreshore and Seabed Act 2004 Analysis of Replacement Regimes [pdf, 465 KB]

   ...United Nations’ Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination ―Decision on Foreshore and Seabed Act 2004‖ (11 March 2005) Decision 1 (66): New Zealand CERD/C/DEC/NZL/1, paragraph 6. 16 Report of the Special Rapporteur on the Situation of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of Indigenous People, Rudolfo Stavenhagen, on his Mission to New Zealand (16 to 25 November 2005), paragraph 79. 17 Pākia Ki Uta, Pākia Ki Tai: Report of the Ministerial Review Panel (Vol 1) 2009, p...

3. Legal aid grants June 2021 [xlsx, 84 KB]

   ...This includes debt recovery, breaches of contract, defamation, and bankruptcy proceedings. It also includes proceedings before tribunals or specialist courts such as the: • Employment Relations Authority • Employment Court • Environment Court • Human Rights Tribunal • Legal Aid Tribunal • Māori Land Court • Immigration & Protection Tribunal • Social Security Appeal Authority • Taxation Review Tribunal • Tenancy Tribunal • Waitangi Tribunal. Civil legal aid is not avai...

4. Reuben Fraser - Evidence in Chief [pdf, 875 KB]

   ...(overview of work done); (iii) Mr Keith Frentz (planhin9); (iv) Dr Philip Ross (marine ecology); (v) Mr Richard Boyd (fisheries); (vQ Captain Roger King ( overview of salvage, recovery and state of the wreck etc); (vii) Mr Peter Cressey (human health); (viii) Mr John Hudsbh (natural character c1nd natural landscape); (ix) Mr Lance Marshall (wreck deterioration); (x) Mr Camie! de Jongh (wreck removal); and (xi) Dr Jon Brod.ie (ecology and ecotoxicity). 3· PRJ:VIOUS REPORTI...

5. [2019] NZEmpC 187 Byrne v The New Zealand Transport Agency [pdf, 411 KB]

   ...Byrne. Mr B considered that Mr Byrne became abusive and hung up. [13] It was at that point that Mrs Byrne told Mr A she intended to make a complaint that she was being bullied. Advice was then sought from and given by Mervyn Johnston, Lead Human Resources (HR) Advisor. [14] This led to Mr Johnston asking Mrs Byrne to provide details of the behaviour which had caused her to become concerned or distressed. She provided a detailed complaint on 1 September 2015, which raised conc...

6. [2021] NZACC 126 - Botha v ACC (4 August 2021) [pdf, 534 KB]

   ...should have happened. [124] Dr McEvoy is a Fellow of the RANZCOG. He has 35 years’ experience as an obstetrician and gynaecologist. He is an examiner and member of the expert witness panel of the RANZCOG. He is a member of a South Australian human research and ethics committee and a member of the South Australian Health Practitioners Tribunal. He is a training supervisor for international medical graduates. Not only is he is amply qualified to give expert evidence in this ca...

7. Review of the Foreshore and Seabed Act 2004 Post Consultation Decisions [pdf, 993 KB]

   ...repealing the law and replacing it with new legislation. Consultation with targeted stakeholders 92 The Attorney-General met with sixteen stakeholders (eg local government, port companies, recreational, conservational, farming, aquaculture, energy and human rights groups) who were considered to be affected by the legislation more than the general public. The Attorney-General used this process to explain his preference and to hear concerns from stakeholders. Some specific feedback rec...

8. [2018] NZSSAA 42 (3 September 2018) [pdf, 701 KB]

   ...provide a breakdown of the benefit for the year ending 31 March 2016. However, the appellant’s circumstances appear to remain reasonably constant, and the figures are sufficient to demonstrate the outcome the Authority must address. [10] The human cost of the Ministry’s approach is well demonstrated by this appeal. Due to the appellant’s lifelong difficulties, it has not been realistic for her to engage in employment. That situation was made more difficult after she suffered...

9. [2017] NZEmpC 127 South Canterbury District Health Board v Sanderson [pdf, 709 KB]

   ...[70] That all said, the DHB’s expectations from 23 June 2017 are as described in Dr Earnshaw’s memorandum of that date. Frequency and urgency of call-back [71] Ms Moginie, who as mentioned earlier, is a director responsible for human resources, collated on-call/call-back data for each of the ATs for the period 1 October 2015 to 31 October 2016. This indicated that an average of approximately 11 per cent of total on-call time was required for call-back in that period...

10. [2014] NZEmpC 23 Greenslade v Jetstar Airways Ltd [pdf, 293 KB]

    ...sense the issues are associated because they both mandate an entitlement of employees to time away from immediate work concerns during a working period, although for different purposes. [41] Mr Harrison identified the rationale as being an issue of human dignity and this appears to be so from the sparse background information provided in support of the Bill which introduced what is now Part 6D. Also discernible are equally general references to qualities of work/life balance and, w...