Search Results

1. CAC 10026 v Dodd [2011] NZREADT 1 [pdf, 184 KB]

   ...continuing as a salesman. Traits such as dishonesty or gross incompetence may be within this category. Less culpable characteristics may well not.” (emphasis added) [87] In Niall v REINZ, High Court Auckland, 9 July 2009 Allan J was considering an appeal from an order cancelling the appellant‘s salespersons licence. Allan J referred to Sime v REINZ (supra) with approval and said: ―The Board does not appear to have considered Mr Niall‘s character as such. Rather it seems...

2. [2013] NZEmpC 242 Udovenko v Offshore Marine Services Ltd [pdf, 153 KB]

   ...interpretation. What is the meaning that would be conveyed to a reasonable person who has all the background knowledge which would reasonably have been available to the parties in the circumstances at the time of the contract? 5 The Court of Appeal in Silver Fern Farms Ltd v New Zealand Meatworkers and Related Trade Unions Inc 6 endorsed a contextualised approach to the interpretation of collective agreements, accepting that it is appropriate to consider prior instruments betwee...

3. [2013] NZEmpC 238 AsiaCiti Trust NZ Ltd v Harris [pdf, 159 KB]

   ...that “the Court may order any party to pay any other party such costs and expenses (including expenses of witnesses) as the court thinks reasonable”. The issue of awards of costs has been the subject of three main decisions of the Court of Appeal and the principles to be applied are now well established. 6 The extent of the Court’s discretion on costs has been confirmed in those decisions. [52] Generally an order of costs will follow the event. The usual reimbursement...

4. Austell v Somerset LCRO 76 / 2009 (2 September 2009) [pdf, 113 KB]

   ...Standards Committee he replied by an email dated 4 March 2009. In that email he stated “I am not guilty of misconduct” and “in the event of a finding of misconduct…[the Committee ought] reserve any decision to publish until any rights of appeal by either party have been exhausted”. The issue of what guidance should be given to a lawyer who is the subject of a complaint was addressed in B v Canterbury District Law Society [2002] 3 NZLR 113 where at para [11] Randerson J st...

5. November 2015 Outstanding applications [pdf, 243 KB]

   ...45/93 Mary Joss CJ 2015/40 - Amopo Te Atatu or Whakaturou or Kohu - and a succession order made at 29 Tauranga MB 355 on 22 May 1969 - Application to the Chief Judge A20150006148 58/93 Maria Kingi, Rangi Taupatu, Cynthia Kingi, Ronald Puata Appeal 2015/17 - Ngati Maru (Fisheries) Trust - and an order of the Maori Land Court at 341 Aotea MB 211-222 dated 15 September 2015 - Appeal (Respondents: Te Ohu Kaimoana Trustee Limited) A20150006177 45/93 Kenneth Brown, Canadian T...

6. December 2015 Outstanding applications [pdf, 244 KB]

   ...45/93 Mary Joss CJ 2015/40 - Amopo Te Atatu or Whakaturou or Kohu - and a succession order made at 29 Tauranga MB 355 on 22 May 1969 - Application to the Chief Judge A20150006148 58/93 Maria Kingi, Rangi Taupatu, Cynthia Kingi, Ronald Puata Appeal 2015/17 - Ngati Maru (Fisheries) Trust - and an order of the Maori Land Court at 341 Aotea MB 211-222 dated 15 September 2015 - Appeal (Respondents: Te Ohu Kaimoana Trustee Limited) A20150006177 45/93 Kenneth Brown, Canadian T...

7. Paterson v Whangarei District Council [2012] NZWHT Auckland 18 [pdf, 168 KB]

   ...care. [39] In Hartley v Balemi,6 Stevens J concluded that personal involvement does not necessarily mean the physical work needs to be undertaken by a director but may include administering the construction of the building. The Court of Appeal in Body Corporate 202254 v Taylor7 has also more recently considered director liability 2 Body Corporate 183523 v Tony Tay & Associates Ltd HC Auckland CIV-2004-404-4824, 30...

8. Complaints Assessment Committee 414 v Deepak Goyal [2017] NZREADT 58 [pdf, 235 KB]

   ...papers. A telephone conference will be scheduled to make appropriate timetable orders. [71] Pursuant to s 113 of the Real Estate Agents Act 2008, the Tribunal draws the parties’ attention to s 116 of the Real Estate Agents Act 2008, which sets out appeal rights. Any appeal must be filed in the High Court within 20 working days of the date on which the Tribunal’s decision is served. The procedure to be followed is set out in part 20 of the High Court Rules. ___________...

9. [2018] NZEmpC 20 Smith v Director General of the Ministry for Primary Industries [pdf, 282 KB]

   ...criticism is that Mr Blake was unable to make a decision about Mr X’s claim of self-defence while her decision, effectively, accepted it. [42] In Airline Stewards and Hostesses of New Zealand IUOW v Air New Zealand Ltd4 the Court of Appeal accepted a prima face case of disparity of treatment, leading to a dismissal, may be unjustifiable in the absence of an adequate explanation by the employer. Two Air New Zealand stewards were charged jointly with smuggling a video casse...

10. Smith - Waiomu 3B2B2B3B2(2015) 105 Waikato Maniapoto MB 12 (105 WMN 5) [pdf, 185 KB]

    ...access to 1B, B2 and European land to the east of B2 was declined. 10 Another application was brought by Taimoana Turoa, one of the then trustees of B2, in 1986. This was the decision that was declined by the Māori Land Court in 1989. 11 An appeal to the Māori Appellate Court was also dismissed in December 1989. [28] The Māori Land Court’s reasons for dismissing the application were referred to earlier in this judgment. As set out in Mr Smith’s evidence, the circumsta...