Search Results

1. Cole & Anor v Euro-Asia Investments Ltd & Ors [2013] NZWHT Auckland 8 [pdf, 140 KB]

   ........................................................................................................15 CONCLUSION AND ORDERS ...............................................................................17 Page | 3 INTRODUCTION [1] This claim has been remitted back to the Tribunal by the High Court following an appeal against the Tribunal’s final determination of 19 April 2012.1 The Tribunal has been directed by the High Court to determine the quantum of damages...

2. Pritchard v Toa-Wairere - Rangitatau Waitotara 3C2B2 3C2B3 (2021) 432 Aotea MB 112 (432 AOT 112) [pdf, 250 KB]

   ...concerning the use of the land and related activities were also again raised, and I pointed out that those matters and the issues set out in the farm consultant report had been canvassed in my earlier decision of 4 December 2019, which had not been appealed. At the conclusion of the hearing, I appointed the three nominated trustees for whom there were no objections and adjourned the application to chambers for a decision to issue in due course concerning the appointment of the remain...

3. Tutakangahau v Boynton - Allotment 335 Parish of Waiotahi [2024] Chief Judge's MB 291 (2024 CJ 291) [pdf, 306 KB]

   ...that takes 2024 Chief Judge's MB 299 into account the nature and gravity of the matter at issue.6 This means that the applicant must establish on the balance of probabilities that there was a mistake or omission. [22] The Court of Appeal has confirmed that the power under s 44(1) falls into two parts:7 The first is an evaluative decision as to whether the order made was “erroneous in fact and law because of any mistake or omission on the part of the court or the Re...

4. Cooper v Corrections [2019] NZHRRT 23 [pdf, 201 KB]

   ...sentence, consultation with the employer is required because of the need to monitor offenders during the working day. Without such contact, a community-based sentence would not be supported. [38] In R v Willing (1997) 15 CRNZ 340 (CA), the Court of Appeal considered the exception in Principle 11(e)(iv). The Court endorsed a statement made by Hammond J in R v Parsons (1995) 2 HRNZ 166 (HC), that the purpose of the exception in Principle 11(e)(iv), is intended to ensure that law enforce...

5. LCRO 46/2016 Richard Zhao v Yu Sun and Li Wang (7 May 2020) [pdf, 133 KB]

   ...consent for the review to be completed on the papers. [32] Nothing further was heard from Mr Deliu or Mr Zhao, and an update on the course of the litigation was sought by this Office on 1 March 2017. [33] On 4 July 2017, Mr Zhao advised that he was appealing an adverse decision by the Court in respect of a strike-out application brought by him. He requested that in the meantime, the review proceed. [34] Mr Zhao provided a copy of the High Court judgment15 on 12 December 2017. [...

6. LCRO 64/2020 - QR - Application for review of a prosecutorial decision (7 September 2020) [pdf, 219 KB]

   ...Acts) is beyond the jurisdiction of this Office. Neither the Standards Committee or this Office can undertake to do this. [59] The decision as to what constitutes the best forum in which to examine matters was commented on by the Court of Appeal in Orlov v New Zealand Law Society where the Court held that there was no threshold test to meet before matters could be referred to the Tribunal.16 The Court also held:17 … a decision [to lay charges] does not determine the outcome...

7. [2013] NZEmpC 34 Baker v St John Central Regional Trust Board [pdf, 102 KB]

   ...Baker was not obliged to accept work, as she accepted in evidence. Indeed from time to time she declined work even though she had previously indicated her availability. In Clark v Oxfordshire Health Authority 7 the English and Wales Court of Appeal held that a nurse, who had no obligation to accept hours offered (and likewise the employer had no obligation to offer work), was effectively a casual employee. The nurse had worked casual engagements for the Health Authority for over...

8. [2013] NZEmpC 175 Tranzit Coachlines Wairarapa v Morgan & Wilson [pdf, 171 KB]

   ...plaintiff, referred us to three authorities which have given consideration to s 12 of the Holidays Act. They are of assistance as to the approach to be adopted although the context of these cases is different from the present. [19] The Court of Appeal considered s 12 in New Zealand Fire Service Commission v New Zealand Professional Firefighters Union. 3 That case involved issues relating to public holidays of a different kind to the present. However, on s 12 the Court stated...

9. [2017] NZEmpC 45 Ports of Auckland Ltd v Findlay [pdf, 125 KB]

   ...their course without undue interruption and delay. A stop-start approach to an investigative and disciplinary process which invites intervention along the way from the Authority; the Employment Court on a challenge; and potentially the Court of Appeal and Supreme Court by way of further appeal; is plainly undesirable for public policy reasons. [24] In the present case, a number of concerns have been raised as to the propriety of aspects of the employer’s process, some of whic...

10. Real Estate Agents Authority (CAC 403) v Drever [2016] NZREADT 72 [pdf, 131 KB]

    ...of Charged Conduct Nature of Conduct Substantive Decision Penalty Decision CA4825587 January–February 2011 Conduct relating to instructions for sale by auction 22 August 2011 Unsatisfactory conduct 4 November 2011 Censured (appealed by Complainant; settlement reached) CB5858318 November 2011 Did not provide Guides, provided insufficient information relating to subdivision, did not insert material particulars on sale and purchase agreement, did not advise...