Search Results

1. [2019] NZEmpC 153 Savage v Wai Shing Ltd [pdf, 545 KB]

   ...http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2000/0024/latest/link.aspx?id=DLM60393#DLM60393 http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2000/0024/latest/link.aspx?id=DLM60387#DLM60387 [12] In Peter Reynolds Mechanical Ltd t/a The Italian Job Service Centre v Denyer (Labour Inspector), the Court of Appeal confirmed that background events may form part of the relevant context, for example, in determining the nature of the asserted default.3 [13] The principles relating to the exercise...

2. [2020] NZREADT 30 Cavanagh (23 July 2020) [pdf, 545 KB]

   ...to remove herself from involvement in the business, and the measures put in place by the agency which employed her, concerning her supervision and management of her professional work, and management of her financial affairs. [65] The Registrar appealed to the High Court. The Court found that the Tribunal was wrong to conclude on the evidence before it that the applicant had established that she was a fit and proper person to be licensed. The Court contrasted the brevity of the p...

3. [2021] NZACC 69 - Auva'a v ACC (28 April 2021) [pdf, 312 KB]

   IN THE DISTRICT COURT AT WELLINGTON I TE KŌTI-Ā-ROHE KI TE WHANGANUI-A-TARA [2021] NZACC 69 ACR 065/17 UNDER THE ACCIDENT COMPENSATION ACT 2001 IN THE MATTER OF AN APPEAL UNDER SECTION 149 OF THE ACT BETWEEN AUTUSITINO AUVA’A Appellant AND ACCIDENT COMPENSATION CORPORATION Second Respondent Hearing: 14 April 2021 Held at: Auckland/Tāmaki Makaurau Appearances: H Peart for the appellant F Becroft for the Accident Compens...

4. [2022] NZACC 132 - GG v ACC (11 July 2022) [pdf, 314 KB]

   ...AND ANY DETAILS THAT MIGHT IDENTIFY THE APPELLANT IN THE DISTRICT COURT AT WELLINGTON I TE KŌTI-Ā-ROHE KI TE WHANGANUI-A-TARA [2022] NZACC 132 ACR 290/19 UNDER THE ACCIDENT COMPENSATION ACT 2001 IN THE MATTER OF AN APPEAL UNDER SECTION 149 OF THE ACT BETWEEN GG Appellant AND ACCIDENT COMPENSATION CORPORATION Respondent Hearing: 4 July 2022 Held at: Rotorua/Rotorua-Nui-A-Kahumatamomoe Appearances: The Appellant is self-repr...

5. Nathan v Accident Compensation Corporation [2022] NZACC 206 [pdf, 455 KB]

   IN THE DISTRICT COURT AT WELLINGTON I TE KŌTI-Ā-ROHE KI TE WHANGANUI-A-TARA [2022] NZACC 206 ACR 442/13 UNDER THE ACCIDENT COMPENSATION ACT 2001 IN THE MATTER OF AN APPEAL UNDER SECTION 149 OF THE ACT BETWEEN M NATHAN Appellant AND ACCIDENT COMPENSATION CORPORATION Respondent Hearings: 24 November 2021; 6 September 2022 Heard at: Auckland/Tamaki Makaurau Evidence and supplementary submissions completed: 5 September 202...

6. Te Manutukutuku (Issue 82) [pdf, 14 MB]

   ...within the wider Health Services and Outcomes Inquiry. An issue arose in the Oranga Tamariki urgency as to whether the Tribunal had the power to summons the Minister for Children to explain her position. As noted later in this issue, the Court of Appeal upheld the Tribunal’s authority to do so. All this activity takes place against the backdrop of the proposed review of the Tribunal’s scope and purpose, as set out in the coalition agree- ment between the National and New Zeala...

7. Prasad v Accident Compensation Corporation (Work Related Gradual Process Injury) [2024] NZACC 182 (18 November 2024) [pdf, 309 KB]

   IN THE DISTRICT COURT AT WELLINGTON I TE KŌTI-Ā-ROHE KI TE WHANGANUI-A-TARA [2024] NZACC 182 ACAR 238/23 UNDER THE ACCIDENT COMPENSATION ACT 2001 IN THE MATTER OF AN APPEAL UNDER SECTION 149 OF THE ACT BETWEEN SATEND PRASAD Appellant AND ACCIDENT COMPENSATION CORPORATION Respondent Hearing: 9 September 2024 Written Submissions: 12 and 16 September 2024 Appearances: M Edison for the appellant F Becroft for the respondent...

8. [2025] NZEmpC 76 Vegepod NZ Ltd v Lowe [pdf, 291 KB]

   ...NZEmpC 59, [2021] ERNZ 153 at [6]-[9], citing NZ Tax Refunds Ltd v Brooks Homes Ltd [2013] NZCA 90, (2013) 13 TCLR 531 at [12]- [13]. 4 See McKean v Ports of Auckland Ltd [2011] NZEmpC 128, [2011] ERNZ 312 at [4]. [12] As the Court of Appeal made clear in NZ Tax Refunds Ltd v Brooks Homes Ltd, a serious question to be tried is one that is not vexatious and frivolous.5 Once that (relatively low) threshold is overcome, the merits of the case (insofar as they can be ascertai...

9. ENV-2016-AKL-000185 Viaduct Harbour Holdings Limited v Auckland Council (scope) [pdf, 9.1 MB]

   Notice of appeal to Environment Court against decision on proposed Auckland combined plan Dated: 16 September 2016 Before the Environment Court In the matter of: Local Government (Auckland Transitional Provisions) Act 2010 (LGATPA) and the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) - Appeal against decision on proposed Auckland combined plan – s 156(1) of the LGATPA – Topic 050 City Centre – Viaduct Harbour Precinct - rezoning Lighter Quay as Sub-Precinct...

10. Pinnock & Ors as Trustees of the Pinnock Trust v Auckland City Council [2011] NZWHT Auckland 28 [pdf, 373 KB]

    ...claim that was filed with the Department of Building and Housing in August 2008 was based on the same cause of action that accrued in 2001, that is economic loss as a result of leaks. He further relied on Pullar v The Queen2 where the Court of Appeal concluded at paragraph 19: “It is not necessary, in order for time to start running, to be able to pin point with precision the exact cause of every defect. Indeed, that would frequently mean time will not start running until...