Search Results

1. [2015] NZEmpC 28 Stevens v Hapag-Lloyd (NZ) Ltd [pdf, 307 KB]

   ...during the course of the process. What is evident is that there was some change of representation. However, I am not persuaded on the basis of the material relied on by the defendant that this led to a discernible increase in its costs. [101] The investigation meeting was adjourned, on the plaintiff’s application, at a late stage. I accept that this would have increased HL Ltd’s costs because of wasted preparation time, and that a modest uplift is appropriate in the circums...

2. [2020] NZEnvC 186 Panuku Development Auckland Limited v Auckland Council [pdf, 3.1 MB]

   ...blasting" after "rock-breaking". Add "This offer shall remain open for acceptance until such time as all rock- breaking and blasting has been completed on the site". Construction Noise and Vibration Management Plan (CNVMP) [101] Our interim decision set out concerns about the approach to management plans in the set of conditions that was then in front of us. [102] Drawing from Summerset, 34 a decision dealing with consent conditions: As a general principle i...

3. [2024] NZEnvC 100 Merveber Limited v Auckland Council [pdf, 3.2 MB]

   ...features of the Kombi proposal could readily be replicated in other similar Business: Light Industrial Zone locations and the site in question had no distinguishing features that made it sufficiently unusual to avoid a precedent being set. [101] Although this application is in the context of a Mixed Rural Zone, we reach the same conclusion that there are no factors that are of particular distinction in this case from the neighbouring properties or in fact other properties within a...

4. [2015] NZSSAA 84 (13 November 2015) [pdf, 151 KB]

   ...for most of the month. We are in no doubt that there was no basis on which the appellant could be said to have had no money for food as at 2 February 2004. The food grant is to be made recoverable. 21 Food grant – 16 March 2005 [101] The appellant made an application for a food grant on 16 March 2005 and a grant of $105 was made. On 16 March 2005 the joint account had a credit balance of $665.74. The closing balance on 18 March was $1,655.75. At no point during the pr...

5. [2014] NZEmpC 229 Brown Sycamore v New Zealand Basing Limited of Hong Kong [pdf, 306 KB]

   ...(citations omitted). 54 Mazengarb’s Employment Law (online looseleaf ed, LexisNexis) at [ERA238.2]. would be frustrated. That intention is confirmed by the wide language used in the section. A broad interpretation is appropriate. [101] Applying s 238 as construed to the present circumstances, Mr Brown and Mr Sycamore as peripatetic employees based in New Zealand fall within the ambit of the ERA. The choice of law clause, if applied to the present facts, would provide...

6. LCRO 48/2019 VW v EX and TY (3 May 2021) [pdf, 324 KB]

   ...[100] This contrasts with the disciplinary process which is inquisitorial and investigative, and does not sufficiently allow for the testing by cross-examination of evidence as is required for the just resolution of significant civil disputes. [101] Although decisions of Standards Committees, and Review Officers have frequently stated the complaints process is not an alternative to court proceedings, if arising out of an action in negligence brought by a client against a lawyer there...

7. LCRO 197/2017 SM v HW (29 March 2019) [pdf, 293 KB]

   ...and the corresponding right of the solicitor to offer his or her services to the public generally”. Also relevant to the public interest is “mobility within the profession … [a]ccess to specialist services and market competition”.23 [101] Illustrations of a former client’s information held to have been relevant include a lawyer’s knowledge about the “personalities ... weaknesses, fears and reactions” of several members of a family gained by having acted for them ov...

8. [2020] NZEmpC 73 Waste Management NZ Ltd v Jones [pdf, 361 KB]

   ...provide relevant information. With one possible exception, to be discussed shortly, all of the requests for information were adequately and promptly answered by Waste Management by emails on 26 April 2016, 2 May 2016, 8 and 9 June 2016. [101] On 25 April 2016 Mr Thompson emailed the first request for information, making it clear that the meeting Mr Shipley had requested would not take place without the material sought being supplied. The request was for: (a) a copy o...

9. [2020] NZREADT 34 - Hammond v Real Estate Agents Authority (11 August 2020) [pdf, 386 KB]

   ...and that there was no evidence to suggest Ms Tafilipepe knew about it before then. He submitted that if the Tribunal were to make that finding, then it could uphold the Committee’s finding that the complaint was not proved. Discussion [101] We accept that there is no evidence to suggest that Ms Tafilipepe knew of the issue with the taps and did not disclose it to the appellants. The fact that the faulty taps were identified in the Property Check report does not establish that...

10. Cole v Realty Insight Limited [2012] NZWHT Auckland 25 [pdf, 259 KB]

    ...Mr Xiang’s advice breached their direct legal and contractual obligations to the claimants. Mr Xiang, by contrast had no contractual relationship with the claimants and was the real estate agent who in law is the agent for the vendor. [101] In my view, the solicitors’ breach of duty to their clients, the claimants, was a serious one. The advice given was plainly wrong. The obligations of a solicitor to his/her client are generally more onerous than any obligation (e.g....