Search Results

1. [2015] NZEmpC 134 Hungry Hound Ltd v Hayes [pdf, 162 KB]

   ...reasonable employer could have done in all the circumstances at the time the dismissal or action occurred. [30] In a redundancy situation, this requires a consideration of both substantive and procedural factors. [31] The Court of Appeal discussed these requirements in Grace Team Accounting Limited v Brake. 5 In its judgment the Court stated: 6 If the decision to make an employee redundant is shown not to be genuine (where genuine means the decision is based on bu...

2. [2015] NZEmpC 188 Randwick Meat Co Ltd v Burns [pdf, 94 KB]

   ...removed by the Authority it should, in the exercise of its discretion, decline to refer the matter back to the Authority because both parties had indicated that any determination of the Authority on the unjustified dismissal claim would inevitably be appealed to the Court. Ms Buckett made the observation that the parties had attended "multiple mediations" as well as a judicial settlement conference, all to no avail. Discussion [27] I have given careful consideration to...

3. Kotahitanga Log Haulage Limited v Forest Distribution Limited - Mangaroa (2015) 121 Waiariki MB 149 (121 WAR 149) [pdf, 162 KB]

   ...both as to the nature of the contractual arrangements and the various parties involved that would, in my view, more properly be dealt with by the Civil Courts. In terms of the interpretation I have applied to section 18(1)(d), I note the Court of Appeal’s consideration of the jurisdiction of this Court in the Attorney General and Māori Land Court case (the Tahora case). 5 Whilst not specifically on section 18(1)(d), the Court of Appeal does highlight the importance of reading sec...

4. Whaanga v Whaanga - Town Section 90 Mahia and Town Section 91 Mahia (2014) 42 Tairawhiti MB 292 (42 TRW 292) [pdf, 202 KB]

   ...[15] On 1 October 1997 succession orders were made at 98 Wairoa MB 7-24 in respect to Ihaka Whaanga’s estate. An order was also made changing the status of sections 90 and 91 from General land to Māori land pursuant to s 133 of TTWM. [16] Mac appealed these orders to the Māori Appellate Court. On 24 February 2000 2 the Appellate Court dismissed the appeal with respect to the status order but cancelled the succession orders because it found that the lower Court had made the succ...

5. McGregor v Hutcheson - Porongahau 1B4'O'2 Trust (2015) 43 Tākitimu MB 15 (43 TKT 15) [pdf, 326 KB]

   ...trustee has failed to carry out the duties of a trustee satisfactorily; or (b) because of lack of competence or prolonged absence, the trustee is or will be incapable of carrying out those duties satisfactorily. [18] In Rameka v Hall the Court of Appeal cited with approval the relevant legal test for removal of trustees as set out in by the Māori Appellate Court in Apatu v Trustees of Owhaoko C1 and 2C: 10 [30] The settled approach in the Maori Appellate Court in applying s 240 i...

6. [2013] NZEmpC 171 Fifita v Dunedin Casinos Ltd [pdf, 126 KB]

   ...difficult when non-monetary remedies, particularly reinstatement, are sought or where the plaintiff’s legitimate interest in the outcome includes non-monetary components, such as reputation or vindication. This has been recognised by the Court of Appeal in a number of cases but what was said in those cases and the approach to be taken was summarised in Bluestar Print Group (NZ) Ltd v Mitchell 6 : [17] The starting point is that reg 68(1) of the regulations provides that the Cou...

7. [2016] NZEmpC 31 A Labour Inspector v Taste of Egypt Limited [pdf, 473 KB]

   ...that the evidence of the Labour Inspector was insufficient when he said: I believe that the respondent [presumably the first respondent TOEL] is liquidating its assets and the directors are preparing to leave New Zealand. I believe that the appeal of the Authority’s determination is merely a stalling tactic to provide the respondent with time to dispose of assets of [the] company and distribute the proceeds of any sale to the directors personally in order to avoid their respo...

8. Gollins Commercial Ltd v Registrar of the REAA [2016] NZREADT 16 [pdf, 154 KB]

   ...cases cited above) “clears him of suspicion” and that he “felt vindicated by the decision”. His attitude of apology in that respect is pleasing. [52] Pursuant to s 113 of the Act, we record that any person affected by this decision may appeal against it to the High Court by virtue of s 116 of the Act. ______________________________ Judge P F Barber Chairperson ______________________________ Mr G Denley Member ______________________________ Mr J...

9. CAC20002 v Gollins [2015] NZREADT 2 [pdf, 178 KB]

   ...advice, Colliers also referred the issue to the Real Estate Agents Authority and the Complaints Assessment Committee decided to lay a charge. This was laid on 24 January 2014. [26] For the sake of completeness, it should be noted that Mr Gollins appealed the decision to charge him on 10 July 2014 and a differently constituted Tribunal found that there was sufficient evidence to justify the Complaints Assessment Committee’s decision to lay a charge. They dismissed the appeal. [2...

10. Glamorgan v Dalbeattie LCRO 220 / 2010 (10 May 2010) [pdf, 117 KB]

    ...to it the $45,000 which the Applicant did. [4] H Ltd subsequently took proceedings in relation to matter. The Court found the Applicant to be in breach of its undertaking and found in favour of H Ltd. The Applicant intended to lodge an appeal against that finding but meanwhile a settlement agreement was reached between XX and the receivers of H Ltd, making the Applicant‟s appeal redundant. [5] The Respondent then filed a complaint with the New Zealand Law Society agains...