Search Results

1. [2016] NZEmpC 169 Robinson v Gillon & Maher Plumbing Ltd [pdf, 152 KB]

   ...extent that it is reasonable to do so bearing in mind the proceeding is at an early stage. d) There must be a balancing of the interests of the parties. This is often an overriding consideration; it was authoritatively summarised by the Court of Appeal in AS McLachlan Ltd v MEL Network Ltd as follows: 5 The rule itself contemplates an order for security where the plaintiff will be unable to meet an adverse award of costs. That must be taken as contemplating also that an order...

2. BORA Lawyers and Conveyancers Amendment Bill [pdf, 322 KB]

   ...not-for-profit. [6] This is a far more limited approach and if adopted would mean that the s 17 right is not engaged by the proposal. 14. The House of Lords fox hunting decision suggests a possible third approach in the United Kingdom. While the Court of Appeal adopted a similar approach to the Canadian cases, and examined whether the prohibition on fox hunting targeted the “associational character” of the activity, [7] the House of Lords [8] instead appears to have focussed on...

3. [2018] NZEnvC 100 Auckland Council v London Pacific Family Trust [pdf, 366 KB]

   ...parties involved, but future plan users. [29] Although these are declaratory proceedings, we find principles that have been applied in other RMA contexts of some relevance here. Costs are not usually awarded against Councils in the context of s120 appeals unless it can be shown that they have neglected a duty. 30 It is even more unlikely that costs will be awarded against Councils in plan appeals and it has been held that a relatively high threshold has to be reached before an award...

4. [2018] NZEnvC 117 Sabatier Family Trust v Auckland Council [pdf, 460 KB]

   ...follow a successful outcome. It is essential that the costs sought are in relation to the Environment Court proceeding. [17] As for the amount or quantum of costs awarded, while the Environment Court has declined to set a scale of costs, for consent appeals (at least), costs ordered have tended to fall within three bands. Justice Heath in Thurlow Consulting Engineers & Surveyors Ltd v Auckland Counci/10 noted these bands are not dissimilar to the standard, increased and indemnit...

5. [2019] NZEmpC 24 Blue Water Hotel Ltd v VBS [pdf, 370 KB]

   ...egregious” to warrant forfeiture of the protections otherwise afforded by the LSA: Checkmate Precision Cutting Tools Ltd v Tomo.2 [11] In that decision, (now) Chief Judge Inglis referred, first, to Laverty v Para Franchising Ltd, where the Court of Appeal observed that:3 For circumstances to qualify as exceptional, however, they have to be “quite out of the ordinary”. [12] Reference was also made to Johns v Johns & Holloway, where Asher J stated:4 The word “exceptional...

6. Tucker v Real Estate Agents Authority (Application for Closed Hearing) [2019] NZHRRT 49 [PDF, 287 KB]

   ...disgraceful conduct made by the Real Estate Agents Disciplinary Tribunal in Real Estate Agents Authority v Tucker [2016] NZREADT 65 and Complaints Assessment Committees 301 and 403 v Tucker [2017] NZREADT 4. That decision was upheld by the High Court on appeal. See Tucker v Real Estate Agents Authority [2017] NZHC 1894. Dr Codyre’s evidence about the past impact of these cases on Mr Tucker’s mental health appears to be based on a self-report from Mr Tucker during a single consultat...

7. [2020] NZEmpC 117 Johnston v The Fletcher Construction Company Ltd [pdf, 222 KB]

   ...Greymouth Petroleum, above n 3, at [21]. [21] Beyond the formal court record, access to the Court’s file by a non-party is only likely to be permitted where what is being pursued is for a recognised and legitimate purpose.14 The Court of Appeal in Greymouth Petroleum Holdings Ltd v Empresa Nacional Del Petróleo commented that the purpose of obtaining documents to assist, or to potentially assist, other litigation is legitimate but only if there is a point to the exercise...

8. Arms (Firearms Prohibition Orders) Amendment Bill (No 2) [pdf, 187 KB]

   ...House of Representatives - 2020 a. the need for the Commissioner to be of the opinion that it is necessary, in the public interest, to make a FPO; b. that the Commissioner is not able to delegate the ability to make a FPO; c. the ability to appeal the Commissioner’s decision to the District Court under s 62 of the principal Act; and d. that FPOs are revocable at any time. 21. Conversely, there are factors that suggest the impairment on the right of freedom of association is...

9. The Intersecting Lines - Business interests and personal autonomy [pdf, 335 KB]

   ...his subsequent dismissal was unfair. The tribunal dismissed his claim that the dismissal was unfair, finding the use of surveillance to be justified and proportionate in its degree of interference with the claimant’s rights. The Employment Appeal Tribunal (UK) upheld that finding. It is clearly desirable to make clear what the employer’s intentions are in relation to any activity which may be said to intrude into an employee’s personal space. It is, however, unlikely that...

10. Wharekura v Skerrett-White - Kawerau A8D (2021) 263 Waiariki MB 71 (263 WAR 71) [pdf, 226 KB]

    ...unreasonable for trust beneficiaries to have included in the trust deed reference to robust and transparent accountability mechanisms. For example, while it 7 Moke v Trustees of Ngāti Tarāwhai Iwi Trust [2019] Māori Appellate Court MB 265 (2019 APPEAL 265). See also Nikora v Tūhoe-Te Uru Taumatua [2020] Māori Appellate Court MB 248 (2020 APPEAL 248) 263 Waiariki MB 76 is not mandatory, it is often a useful check to have included in the trust deed provision for the...