1736 items matching your search terms
...costs principles apply. He submitted that it cannot be said that the defendant was successful as the issues were not required to be resolved by the 4 In fact, 66% of $10,348 is $6,830. 5 Victoria University of Wellington v Alton-Lee [2001] ERNZ 305 (CA) at [48]. 6 Binnie v Pacific Health Ltd [2002] 1 ERNZ 438 (CA) at [14]. Court. I do not accept Mr Ryan’s argument that a different approach to determining costs is required i...
...the remedies that would otherwise have been awarded to an employee to the extent that the actions of the employee contributed towards the situation that gave rise to the personal grievance. No authorities were cited on this issue but in White v Auckland District Health Board 7 the Court of Appeal held that remedies and costs were separate discrete issues. It rejected the suggestion that contributory conduct under s 124 could be taken into account in relation to both remedies and...
...1 [2012] NZEmpC 118. 2 [2013] NZEmpC 56. The total costs sought amounted to $18,774.85. [6] Counsel for the defendant referred to two of the three leading cases on costs in the Court of Appeal, Victoria University of Wellington v Alton-Lee, 3 Binnie v Pacific Health Limited. 4 [7] Counsel for the defendant submitted that the proper approach to determining costs was to enquire into the reasonableness, decide on the level of the contribution
...rights or interests. The requirements of natural justice are “flexible”, “adaptable”, and “context specific”, and cannot be neatly tabulated: “This is an area of broad principle, not precise rules”. Prescribing prescriptive rules of universal application would introduce “a new formalism” – a “recipe for judicialisation on an unprecedented scale”. The courts will look at the matter “in the round” to determine whether the process was fair. Higher standard...
...AND IDENTITY OF THE PARTIES NOT TO BE PUBLISHED PENDING FURTHER ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL INTERIM DECISION REPRESENTATION: Registrar: In person. Complainant: In person. Adviser: Mr S Singh, Singhs Barristers & Solicitors, Auckland. Date Issued: 29 January 2014 2 DECISION Preliminary [1] The Registrar received a complaint relating to the adviser. [2] The Registrar identified the basis of the complaint as being that the adviser: [2...
...HUMAN RIGHTS REVIEW TRIBUNAL [2017] NZHRRT 43 Reference No. HRRT 066/2015 UNDER THE PRIVACY ACT 1993 BETWEEN KELVYN JAMES YOUNGMAN PLAINTIFF AND WAIKATO DISTRICT HEALTH BOARD DEFENDANT AT AUCKLAND BEFORE: Ms MA Roche, Co-Chairperson Ms LJ Alaeinia, Member Mr MJM Keefe JP, Member REPRESENTATION: Ms OJ Morgan for plaintiff Mr PM White for defendant DATE OF HEARING: Heard on the papers DATE OF DECISION: 17 November 20...
Reference No. HRRT 008/2017 UNDER THE PRIVACY ACT 1993 BETWEEN VICENTE BADILLO-LOPEZ PLAINTIFF AND UBER NEW ZEALAND DEFENDANT AT AUCKLAND BEFORE: Ms M Roche, Chairperson Dr SJ Hickey MNZM, Member Mr RK Musuku, Member REPRESENTATION: Mr V Badillo-Lopez in person Mr J Edwards and Ms R Carter for defendant DATE OF HEARING: Heard on the papers DATE OF DECISION: 22 March 2019 DECISION OF TRIBUNAL STRIKING OUT CLAIM1 [1] In February...
...before commencing his claim. 1 For clarity, the plaintiff, Mr Jacob Pietras is represented by counsel, Mr Joshua Pietras. Mr Pietras says he undertook 6 hours of work for Ms Vegar, but was not paid [3] In June 2020, Mr Pietras was a university student looking for extra income. [4] He saw a job advertised on the Student Job Search website. The job was for a fixed term role, collecting signatures for a parliamentary petition entitled “Stop Trading New Zealand Awa...
...aside a bankruptcy notice,14 in her opposition to the application to adjudicate her 9 Beauchamp v B & T Co (2011) Ltd (Costs) [2022] NZHRRT 30 (Beauchamp) at [15] and [16]. 10 Beauchamp as above, at [15]; referencing Smith at [5]; and Turner v University of Otago (Costs) [2021] NZHRRT 48, at [7.1]. 11 See Smith at [47] and Turner at [7.2]. 12 See Smith 4 at [5] and Turner at [7.1] and the table Costs Awarded published on the Tribunal’s web page. [ 13 Tao v Body Corporate 198693...
KEN MERCHANT V CHIEF EXCEUTIVE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AK AC 26/09 [25 June 2009] IN THE EMPLOYMENT COURT AUCKLAND AC 26/09 ARC 54/05 IN THE MATTER OF a challenge to a determination of the Employment Relations Authority AND IN THE MATTER OF an application for costs BETWEEN KEN MERCHANT Plaintiff AND CHIEF EXCEUTIVE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS Defendant Hearing: Submissions received 30 January & 3 April 2009 Judgment: 25 June 2009...