Damages awarded

Damages Awarded by the Human Rights Review Tribunal under Human Rights Act 1993, Privacy Act 1993 and Health and Disability Commissioner Act 1994

DateCaseNotesAward

22 March 2012

Director of Proceedings v Taikura Trust [2012] NZHRRT 3

HDCA

  • s 54(1)(a) – declaration of breach of Code – Rights 3, 4(1) and 4(5)

N/A

22 March 2012

Director of Proceedings v Aranui Home and Hospital Ltd [2012] NZHRRT 4

HDCA

  • s 54(1)(a) – declaration of breach of Code – Right 4(1)

N/A

27 March 2012

Lochead-MacMillan v AMI Insurance Ltd [2012] NZHRRT 5

PA

  • s 85(1)(a) – declaration of breach of privacy
 
  • s 88(1)(c) – damages for emotional harm
$10,000

26 April 2012

Hale v Chester Burt Funeral Home Ltd [2012] NZHRRT 10

PA

  • s 85(1)(a) – declaration of interference with privacy
  • defendant to publish apology
 
  • s 88(1)(c) – damages for emotional harm
$5,000

28 March 2012

Director of Proceedings v Zhu [2012] NZHRRT 7

HDCA

  • s 54(1)(a) – declaration of breach of Code – Rights 1(1), 2, 3, 4(1), 4(2) and 4(3)
 
  • s 57(1)(c) – damages for emotional harm
$5,000

6 July 2012

Fehling v South Westland Area School [2012] NZHRRT 15

PA

  • s 85(1)(a) – declaration of interference with privacy
 
  • s 88(1)(c) – damages for emotional harm
$10,000

23 August 2012

Director of Human Rights Proceedings v INS Restorations Ltd [2012] NZHRRT 18

PA

  • s 85(1)(a) – declaration of interference with privacy
  • s 85(1)(d) – company to provide aggrieved person with access to personal information
 
  • s 88(1)(c) – damages for emotional harm
$20,000

30 August 2012

Holmes v Ministry of Social Development [2012] NZHRRT 19

PA

Tribunal found two separate breaches.  In relation to both breaches a declaration made under s 85(1)(a) that there had been an interference with privacy.  In relation to the first breach $10,000 awarded for emotional harm.  In relation to the second breach damages of $7,000 awarded for emotional harm.  On appeal the High Court set aside the $10,000 award.  The $7,000 award was reduced to $2,000.

 

 

 

 

 

$2,000

7 September 2012

Steele v Board of Trustees of Salisbury School [2012] NZHRRT 20

PA

Declaration of interference with privacy denied.  No damages or other forms of remedy under ss 85 and 88 awarded.  This on account of Mr Steele’s behaviour as a litigant.

N/A

1 November 2012

Director of Human Rights Proceedings v Hamilton [2012] NZHRRT 24

PA

  • s 85(1)(a) – declaration of interference with privacy
  • s 85(1)(d) –Mr Hamilton to provide access to withheld information.
 
  • s 88(1)(b) – damages for loss of benefit
$5,000
  • s 88(1)(c) – damages for emotional harm
$15,000

16 November 2012

Nilsson v Summerset Care Ltd [2012] NZHRRT 25

HDCA

  • s 54(1)(a) – declaration of breach of Code – Rights 4(1), 4(2), 4(3) and 6(1)

 

N/A

25 February 2013

Director of Proceedings v Emms [2013] NZHRRT 5

HDCA

  • s 54(1)(a) – declaration of breach of Code – Rights 2, 4(1), 4(2), 6(2) and 7(1)
 
  • s 54(1)(c) – damages for emotional harm
$15,000
  • Application by Director for an award of punitive damages under s 57(1)(c) dismissed
 

20 September 2013

Geary v Accident Compensation Corporation [2013] NZHRRT 34

PA

Principle 6 claim

  • s 85(1)(a) – declaration of interference with privacy
  • s 85(1)(d) – ACC to provide access to withheld information
 
  • s 88(1)(c) – damages for emotional harm
$5,000

Principle 11 claim

  • s 85(1)(a) – declaration of interference with privacy
 
  • s 88(1)(c) – damages for significant emotional harm
$15,000

3 October 2013

Director of Proceedings v Northlink Health [2013] NZHRRT 35

HDCA

  • s 54(1)(a) – declaration of breach of Code – Right 4(1)

N/A

14 November 2013

Director of Proceedings v Candish [2013] NZHRRT 40

HDCA

  • s 54(1)(a) – declaration of breach of Code – Rights 4(1) and 4(2)

N/A

4 February 2014

Director of Proceedings v Nelson Marlborough District Health Board [2014] NZHRRT 4

HDCA

  • s 54(1)(a) – declaration of breach of Code – Rights 4(1), 4(4) and 6

N/A

12 February 2014

DML v Montgomery [2014] NZHRRT 6

HRA  (appeal abandoned on 9 June 2014)

  • s 92I(3)(a) – declaration that plaintiff subjected to language of a sexual nature which was unwelcome and offensive to the plaintiff and which was repeated and of such a significant nature that it had a detrimental effect on the plaintiff in the course of her employment
  • s 92I(3)(b) – order restraining defendants from continuing or repeating breach of s 62
 
  • ss 92I(3)(c) and 92M(1)(c) – damages for emotional harm
$25,000
  • order under s 92I(3)(f) that defendants, in conjunction with the Human Rights Commission, provide training to the first defendant and to the management staff of the second defendant in relation to their obligations under the Human Rights Act 1993
 

24 February 2014

Nakarawa v AFFCO New Zealand Ltd [2014] NZHRRT 9

HRA (appeal abandoned)

  • s 92I(3)(a) – declaration that AFFCO committed a breach of s 22(1) by discriminating against Mr Nakarawa for reason of his religious beliefs
 
  • ss 92I(3)(c) and 92M(1)(b) – damages for loss of benefit in the form of wages Mr Nakarawa might reasonably have been expected to obtain but for the breach
$12,118
  • ss 92I(3)(c) and 92M(c) – damages for humiliation, loss of dignity and injury to feelings
$15,000
  • s 92I(3)(f) – order that AFFCO, in conjunction with the Human Rights Commission, provide training to its management staff in relation to their and AFFCO’s obligations under the Human Rights Act 1993
 

5 June 2014

Director of Proceedings v Saxon [2014] NZHRRT 23

HDCA

  • s 54(1)(a) – declaration of breach of Code – Rights 1(1), 1(2), 4(2), 6(2) and 7(1).

N/A

17 June 2014

Director of Proceedings v Killarney Rest Home (2009) Ltd [2014] NZHRRT 28

HDCA

  • s 54(1)(a) – declaration of breach of Code – Rights 4(1), and 4(2).

N/A

26 August 2014

Director of Proceedings v Southern District Health Board [2014] NZHRRT 38

HDCA

  • s 54(1)(a) – declaration of breach of Code – Rights 4(1), and 4(2).

 N/A

29 August 2014

Koso v Chief Executive, Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment [2014] NZHRRT 39

PA

  • s 85(1)(a) – declaration of interference with privacy
  • balance of claims dismissed.

N/A

30 September 2014

Director of Proceedings v Healthcare of New Zealand Ltd [2014] NZHRRT 46

HDCA

  • s 54(1)(a) – declaration of breach of Code – Rights 1(1), 4(3) and 4(4).

 

N/A

6 October 2014

Armfield v Naughton [2014] NZHRRT 48

PA

  • s 85(1)(a) – declaration of interference with privacy
  • s 85(1)(d) – cease and desist orders
 
  • s 88(1)(c) – damages for emotional harm.
$7,000

14 October 2014

Meulenbroek v Vision Antenna Systems Ltd [2014] NZHRRT 51

HRA

  • s 92I(3)(a) – declaration that Vision committed a breach of s 22(1) by discriminating against Mr Meulenbroek for reason of his religious beliefs.
 
  • ss 92I(3)(c) and 92M(1)(a) – damages for pecuniary loss in the form of lost wages.
$8,128.09
  • ss 92I(3)(c) and 92M(1)(a) – damages for pecuniary loss in the form of legal expenses.
$6,929.90
  • ss 92I(3)(c) and 92M(1)(c) – damages for humiliation, loss of dignity and injury to feelings.
$25,000.00
  • s 92I(3)(f) – order that Vision, in conjunction with the Human Rights Commission, provide training to its directors and management staff in relation to their and Vision’s obligations under the Human Rights Act 1993.
 

3 November 2014

Holmes v Housing New Zealand Corporation [2014] NZHRRT 54

PA

  • s 85(1)(a) – declaration of interference with privacy
 
  • s 85(1)(c) and s 88(1)(b) – damages for loss of benefit
$10,804
  • s 85(1)(c) and s 88(1)(c) – damages for emotional harm.
$10,000

15 December 2014

Director of Human Rights Proceedings v Valli and Hughes [2014] NZHRRT 58

PA

  • s 85(1)(a) – declaration of interference with privacy
 
  • s 85(1)(c) and s 88(1)(b) – damages for loss of benefit
$5,000
  • s 85(1)(c) and s 88(1)(c) – damages for emotional harm
$15,000
  • s 85(1)(c) and (d) – defendants to  provide access to withheld information.
 

19 February 2015

Director of Human Rights Proceedings v Schubach [2015] NZHRRT 4

PA

  • s 85(1)(a) – declaration of interference with privacy
 
  • s 85(1)(c) and s 88(1)(a) – damages for pecuniary loss in the form of legal expenses
$1,374.25
  • s 85(1)(c) and s 88(1)(b) – damages for loss of benefit
$5,000
  • s 85(1)(c) and s 88(1)(c) – damages for emotional harm
$5,000
  • s 85(1)(c) and (d) – defendant to  provide access to withheld information.
 

2 March 2015

Hammond v Credit Union Baywide [2015] NZHRRT 6

PA

  • s 85(1)(a) – declaration of interference with privacy
 
  • s 85(1)(c) and s 88(1)(a) – damages for pecuniary loss in the form of lost income
$38,350
  • s 85(1)(c) and s 88(1)(a) – damages for pecuniary loss in the form of legal expenses
$15,543.10
  • s 85(1)(c) and s 88(1)(b) – damages for loss of benefit
$16,177.78
  • s 85(1)(c) and s 88(1)(c) – damages for emotional harm
$98,000
  • s 85(1)(b), (d) and (e) – restraining order
  • s 85(1)(d) and (e) – retraction of information
  • s 85(1)(d) – retraction of email and apology to be given
  • s 85(1)(d) and (e) – order that NZCU Baywide, in conjunction with the Privacy Commissioner, provide training to its management staff in relation to their and NZCU Baywide’s obligations under the Privacy Act 1993.
 

9 March 2015

Satnam Singh v Shane Singh and Scorpion Liquor (2006) Ltd [2015] NZHRRT 8

HRA – [Decision set aside on 2 June 2015 and re-hearing ordered] See new decision at [2016] NZHRRT 38 (23 December 2016)

  • s 92I(3)(a) – declaration that first and second defendants committed a breach of s 63 by subjecting plaintiff to racial harassment.
  • s 92I(3)(b) – order restraining first and second defendants from continuing or repeating the breach of s 63.
$45,000
  • ss 92I(3)(c) and 92M(1)(c) – damages for humiliation, loss of dignity and injury to feelings.
$45,000
  • s 92I(3)(f) – order that first and second defendants, in conjunction with the Human Rights Commission, provide training to first defendant and management staff of second defendant in relation to their and Scorpion Liquor’s obligations under the Human Rights Act 1993.
 

17 April 2015

Heads v Attorney-General [2015] NZHRRT 12

HRA

  • s 92J – declaration of inconsistency.
 

14 May 2015

Taylor v Orcon Ltd [2015] NZHRRT 15

PA

  • s 85(1)(a) – declaration of interference with privacy
 
  • s 85(1)(c) and s 88(1)(b) – damages for loss of benefit
$10,000
  • s 85(1)(c) and s 88(1)(c) – damages for emotional harm
$15,000
  • s 85(1)(d) and (e) – order that Orcon Ltd, in conjunction with the Privacy Commissioner, provide training to its staff in relation to the obligations of Orcon Ltd under the Privacy Act 1993
 

7 July 2015

Watson v Capital & Coast District Health Board [2015] NZHRRT 27

PA

  • s 85(1)(a) – declaration of interference with privacy
 
  • s 85(1)(c) and s 88(1)(b) – damages for loss of benefit
$5,000
  • s 85(1)(c) and s 88(1)(c) – damages for emotional harm
$10,000
  • s 85(1)(d) and (e) – order that CCDHB provide to Ms Watson (without redaction) the two withheld documents within five days after the date of decision.
 

29 July 2015

Director of Human Rights Proceedings v Crampton [2015] NZHRRT 35

PA

  • s 85(1)(a) – declaration of interference with privacy
 
  • s 85(1)(c) and s 88(1)(c) – damages for emotional harm
$18,000
  • s 85(1)(d) and (e) – order that Mr Crampton attend, at his own expense, an “Introduction to the Privacy Act” workshop run by the Office of the Privacy Commissioner.
 

11 August 2015

Holmes v Housing New Zealand Corporation [2015] NZHRRT 36

PA (appeal dismissed 26 November 2015)

  • s 85(1)(a) – declaration of interference with privacy
 
  • s 85(1)(c) and s 88(1)(c) – damages for emotional harm
$400

9 October 2015

McClelland v Schindler Lifts NZ Ltd [2015] NZHRRT 45

HRA

  • s 92I(3)(a) – declaration that defendant committed breach of s 22(1) by discriminating against plaintiff for reason of a physical disability or impairment suspected or assumed or believed by Schindler to exist.
 
  • ss 92I(3)(c) and 92M(1)(a) – damages for pecuniary loss in the form of lost wages
$3,713
  • ss 92I(3)(c) and  92M(1)(a) – damages for pecuniary loss in the form of travel expenses
$700
  • ss 92I(3)(c) and 92M(1)(c) – damages for humiliation, loss of dignity and injury to feelings
$25,000
  • s 92I(3)(f) – order that defendant, in conjunction with Human Rights Commission, provide training to senior management staff in relation to their and defendant’s obligations under the Human Rights Act 1993.
 

22 December 2015

Deeming v Whangarei District Council [2015] NZHRRT 55

PA

  • s 85(1)(a) – declaration of interference with privacy
 
  • s 85(1)(c) and s 88(1)(c) – damages for emotional harm
$2,000
  • s 85(1)(d) and (e) – order that Whangarei District Council, in conjunction with the Privacy Commissioner and at its own expense, provide training to its councillors and management staff in relation to their and the Whangarei District Council’s obligations under the Privacy Act 1993.
 

2 March 2016

MacGregor v Craig [2016] NZHRRT 6

HRA

  • s 92I(3)(a) – declaration that defendant breached the terms of the settlement of the plaintiff’s sexual harassment complaint.
  • s 92I(3)(b) – order restraining defendant from continuing or repeating the breaches of his confidentiality obligations under the settlement, or from engaging in, or causing or permitting others to engage in, conduct of the same kind as that constituting the breach or conduct of any similar kind.
 
  • ss 92I(3)(c) and 92M(1)(a) – damages for pecuniary loss in the form of lost earnings.

$7,000

  • ss 92I(3)(c) and 92M(1)(a) – damages for pecuniary loss in the form of lost earnings.

$1,780

  • ss 92I(3)(c) and 92M(1)(c) – damages for humiliation, loss of dignity and injury to feelings.

$120,000

7 March 2016

Adoption Action Inc v Attorney-General [2016] NZHRRT 9

HRA

  • s 92J – declaration of inconsistency
 

11 May 2016

Sansom v Department of Internal Affairs [2016] NZHRRT 17

PA

  • s 85(1)(a) – declaration of interference with privacy.
 

23 December 2016

Satnam Singh v Shane Singh and Scorpion Liquor (2006) Ltd [2016] NZHRRT 38

HRA

  • s 92I(3)(a) – declaration that first and second defendants committed a breach of s 63 by subjecting plaintiff to racial harassment.
 
  • ss 92I(3)(c) and 92M(1)(c) – damages for humiliation, loss of dignity and injury to feelings.
$25,000
  • s 92I(3)(f) – order that first defendant, in conjunction with the Human Rights Commission, undertake training in relation to his obligations under the Human Rights Act 1993 to ensure he and any future employees are aware of those obligations.
 

This page was last updated: