Search Results

1. [2014] NZEmpC 69 H v A Limited Interlocutory [pdf, 77 KB]

   ...unjustified dismissal. 1 On the same date, however, the Authority nevertheless made a limited order prohibiting publication of such information until 20 January 2014, allowing the plaintiff time to inform his family and to exercise his rights of appeal. The plaintiff challenged this determination on 13 January 2014. [4] On 17 January 2014 the Court made the following interim orders. 5. Pursuant to cl 12 of Schedule 3 to the Employment Relations Act 2000 I make an order prohibi...

2. [2014] NZEmpC 182 Fletcher v Sharp Studhope Lawyers [pdf, 75 KB]

   ...Mr Fletcher submitted that the Authority’s investigation is awaiting the completion of mediation, which is currently adjourned. He says that the requested documents are important for the mediation process because a mediation result cannot be appealed and any factual or legal anomaly carried into mediation cannot subsequently be corrected. It is accordingly submitted that significant irreversible consequences will be suffered if his challenge cannot proceed. I do not accept this...

3. Stebbing – Tauhara Middle 4A 2B 2C (Opepe Farm Trust) (2014) 92 Waiariki MB 218 (92 WAR 218) [pdf, 144 KB]

   ...Appointment of trustees [11] In addition to its core business activities, the trust has been involved in significant litigation over a number of years. Those proceedings were finally concluded on these substantive issues by the judgment of the Court of Appeal Rameka v Hall.3 The only matter outstanding is the questions of what if any costs are payable by the unsuccessful parties. Doubtless the proceedings overall have proved to be a significant distraction to the trust, both in ter...

4. [2015] NZEmpC 3 Fletcher v Sharp Tudhope Lawyers costs [pdf, 73 KB]

   ...that the defendant has raised a number of matters in its costs submissions which are irrelevant, misleading, punitive, and aimed at discrediting him. [5] I start with a consideration of the actual costs incurred by the defendant. The Court of Appeal has made it clear that it is not mandatory for counsel to provide details of time involved and charge out rates when seeking costs. In Binnie v Pacific Health Ltd it observed that: 4 Obviously this kind of information may help, an...

5. ACG Ltd v ZXX Ltd [2011] NZDT 157 (9 May 2011) [pdf, 112 KB]

   ...to be a breach of the Act irrespective of what knowledge ZXX Ltd may or may not have had at the time it made the representation. [8] There appears to have been considerable discussion at the first hearings of this claim and the subsequent appeal in relation to the applicability of the shipping labels and the two per cent allowance for impurities noted on them. The applicability of the labels was also discussed at today’s hearings and I had the benefit of hearing from Mr JN, a...

6. Merito - The Moutoki, Tokata and Rurima Islands (2011) 34 Waiariki MB 176 (34 WAR 176) [pdf, 103 KB]

   ...opportunity to discuss this application with the Registrar and Court staff. The Deputy Registrar responsible for the project confirmed that the owners and their representatives are entitled to notice, to be heard and to pursue the remedies of rehearing, appeal and review. [8] The current application concerns a review of trust that began in 2003. Since then I have issued two reserved judgments on 30 April 2004 and 23 December 2005 dealing with, inter alia, the appointment of new an...

7. Te Ruatahi 2B Trust – Te Ruatahi 2C1 (2013) 58 Taitokerau MB 239 (58 TTK 239) [pdf, 114 KB]

   ...without the consent of any person being required, be laid out – (a) Over any other Māori land...” On the face of it this provision appears to say exactly what it means, that consent of the owners is not required. However in the Court of Appeal judgment in Coles and Ors v Miller and Ors at paragraph 43 the Court says: “We can accept that it would have been a breach of natural justice if the Court had made a roadway order without either obtaining the consent of someone who...

8. CAC 10044 v He [2011] NZREADT 9 [pdf, 90 KB]

   ...to take effect one month from the date of issue of this decision. 3 HC Auckland, CIV 2007-404-1818, 13 August 2007 6 [25] In accordance with s 113 of the Act the Tribunal records the right to appeal this decision to the High Court pursuant to s 116 of the Act. DATED at WELLINGTON this 27 th day of May 2011 ______________________________ Judge Michael Hobbs Chairman ______________________________ Mr...

9. Deputy Registrar – Lot 1 DP 2811 (2013) 18 Te Waipounamu MB 287 (18 TWP 287) [pdf, 116 KB]

   ...implies Henry 4 Laws of New Zealand Land Law: The Place of Land Law in New Zealand (online ed) at [7]. 5 Maori Land Court - Lot 300, Parish of Waioeka (2010) 2010 Maori Appellate Court MB 12 (2010 APPEAL 12) at [52]. 6 Faulkner v Tauranga District Council [1996] 1 NZLR 357. 7 Whaanga – Mahia Township Sections 90 and 91 (2000) 34 Tairāwhiti Appellate Court MB 12 – 31 (34 APGS 12-31). 8 Whaanga v District Land Registrar HC Napier CP...

10. CAC20005 v Cui [2015] NZREADT 23 [pdf, 173 KB]

    ...proceedings. The fine and costs are to be paid to the Registrar of the Authority at Wellington within 20 working days from the date of this decision. [26] 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 J Gaukrodger Member ______________________________ M...