Search Results

1. [2017] NZEmpC 146 Yu v Zespri International Ltd [pdf, 767 KB]

   ...said that for her part, inspection could be an appropriate and pragmatic option. She also pointed out that disclosure in a case such as the present is far from straightforward, given the thousands of documents involved. [31] The Court of Appeal has made it clear that inspection should never occur “as a matter of automatic practice”,2 and that the Court must be in “real doubt” before doing so.3 [32] As I have previously observed, the Court will usually wish to be...

2. Waitangi Tribunal - issue 67 of Te Manutukutuku [pdf, 1.8 MB]

   ...Toiora PHO. She also has extensive experience in working with urban authorities and iwi. Ms Moxon has extensive gov- ernance experience with local and national organisations, including the Early Learning Management Taskforce, the Social Security Appeal Authority, the National Urban Māori Authority, Te Rūnanga o Kirikiriroa, Waikato DHB Iwi Māori Council and Ngāti Pahauwera Development Trust. She has also served on Trust Waikato, Habitat for Humanity and Philanthropy New Zealand...

3. [2022] NZEnvC 106 Guardians of the Bays Inc v Wellington International Airport Ltd [pdf, 2.2 MB]

   IN THE ENVIRONMENT COURT AT WELLINGTON I TE KOTI TAIAO O AOTEAROA KI TE WHANGANUI-A-TARA Decision No. [2022] NZEnvC 106 IN THE MA TIER of appeals under s 17 4 of the Resource Management Act 1991 BETWEEN GUARDIANS OF THE BAYS INC (ENV-2021-WLG-000035 & 37) INTERNATIONAL CLIMATE-SAFE TRAVEL INSTITUTE AND (ENV-2021-WLG-000036) Appellants WELLINGTON INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LTD Respondent Court: Environment Judge B P Dwyer sitting alone under s 279 of the Act Heari...

4. [2014] NZEmpC 213 Hixon v Campbell and Ors substantive [pdf, 264 KB]

   ...consequences of a suggested interpretation.” 12 This suggests that “the context” is not merely the statutory context although that is an essential part of it. Authority for this proposition is the judgment of the New Zealand Court of Appeal in Police v Thompson, 13 which followed the earlier Supreme (now High) Court judgment in Auckland City Corporation v Guardian Trust and Executors Co of New Zealand Ltd, 14 where the Court concluded that the statutory definition of t...

5. [2011] NZEmpC 1 Gyenge v Clifford Lamar Limited [pdf, 221 KB]

   ...suffering at that time I couldn‟t – I would have left long before Emma would – the stress levels that she was suffering were awful. The law [52] The legal principles relating to cases of constructive dismissal were enunciated by the Court of Appeal in Auckland Electric Power Board v Auckland Provincial District Local Authorities Officers IUOW 2 and have subsequently been applied in numerous decisions of this Court. Relevantly, the Court of Appeal stated: 3...

6. [2023] NZEmpC 56 Te Whatu Ora – Health New Zealand v Public Service Association, Te Pūkenga Here Tikanga Mahi [pdf, 471 KB]

   ...continues to be, undervalued due to systemic gender-based discrimination. That consequence is part of the interpretative context. [95] The updating of the EP Act involved an unusual process. It followed the important 2014 judgment of the Court of Appeal in Terranova Homes & Care Ltd v Service and Food Workers Union Nga Ringa Tota Inc, where the Court found the Equal Pay Act 1972 in its then form contained a pay equity regime.41 It recommended that this Court establish princ...

7. LCRO 122/2020 G & P LN v Todd Whitcombe and RC findings & publication decisions (4 May 2021 & 22 June 2021) [pdf, 397 KB]

   ...nature and scope of a review have been discussed by the High Court in several judgments, in which it has said of the process of review under the Act: … the power of review conferred upon Review Officers is not appropriately equated with a general appeal. The obligations and powers of the Review Officer as described in the Act create a very particular statutory process. The Review Officer has broad powers to conduct his or her own investigations including the power to exercise for t...

8. Chee v Stareast Investment Ltd [pdf, 97 KB]

   ...The evidence establishes the contract with TQ was for labour only. [38] The Tribunal has found that both the first and third respondents were the developers of this property. In Mount Albert Borough Council v Johnson6 at [241], the Court of Appeal held that a developer had an absolute duty which is non-delegable. Cooke J stated that a development company has a duty to see that proper care and skill are exercised in the building of houses and that it cannot be avoided by del...

9. Proactive release - Improving the justice response to victims of sexual violence [pdf, 7.7 MB]

   ...adult complainant is permitted to give evidence in an alternative way.3 It is not uncommon in sexual violence cases for complainants to give their evidence-in-chief by way of pre-recorded video of their original police interview. However, a Court of Appeal decision in 2011 has limited the use of pre-recorded cross-examination (questioning by the defence lawyer) to rare and exceptional circumstances.4 3 Since amendments to the Evidence Act 2006 came into force in 2017, child witnesses have been...

10. [2020] NZEmpC 139 KiwiRail Ltd v Mobbs [pdf, 450 KB]

    ...employment agreements on the one hand, and rectification on the other. These principles establish what evidence is admissible in each case. Legal framework Interpretation principles [24] In The Malthouse Ltd v Rangatira Ltd,4 the Court of Appeal provided a convenient summary of the correct approach to contractual interpretation, as stated by the Supreme Court in Vector Gas Ltd v Bay of Plenty Energy Ltd,5 and Firm PI 1 Ltd v Zurich Australian Insurance Ltd.6 The Court stat...