Search Results

1. [2011] NZEmpC 125 Angus v Ports of Auckland Limited [pdf, 160 KB]

   ...non-exhaustive because of 4 See, for example, New Zealand Educational Institute v Board of Trustees of Auckland Normal Intermediate School [1992] 3 ERNZ 243 (Labour Court) affirmed by the Court of Appeal in New Zealand Educational Institute v The Board of Trustees of Auckland Normal Intermediate School [1994] 2 ERNZ 414; Lewis v Howick College Board of Trustees [2010] NZEmpC 4, [2010] ERNZ 1; Jinkinson v Oceana Gold (NZ) Ltd [2010]...

2. [2011] NZEmpC 34 Martin v Northland Education Trust Inc [pdf, 219 KB]

   ...evidence may affect the remedy of reinstatement. Here, it may be in issue both under s 124 of the Act (contributory conduct going to the nature and extent of remedies) and it may otherwise affect the extent of remedies as established in the Court of Appeal in Salt v Fell. 4 [67] It is, however, necessary to analyse and make findings on that evidence because some of it is disputed by the plaintiff and, even if it is undisputed, its significance and weight requires consideration an...

3. [2012] NZEmpC 19 Warmington & ONeill v AFFCO NZ Ltd [pdf, 214 KB]

   ...information), the information that they do have is likely to be of use to Silver Fern Farms. [72] The difficulties associated with inadvertent disclosure were traversed in The Littlewoods Organisation Ltd v Harris. 13 There the English Court of Appeal observed that: 14 11 AEC 14/95, 10 March 1995. 12 At [29]. 13 [1978] 1 All ER 1026. 14 At 1033. It is thus established that an employer can stipulate for...

4. EMPC Swearing in Judge Perkins [pdf, 217 KB]

   ...claims. I was employed by my next door neighbour, who was the senior partner in the firm, to fill a vacancy soon to occur when the firm’s junior common law solicitor left on his great OE. That was one Rhys Harrison, now a Justice of our Court of Appeal. Rhys and I had a period of overlap of several months as employees of the firm which we both greatly enjoyed. So you can see why I soon naturally drifted towards a practice in maritime law and industrial law. When I think of my...

5. [2012] NZEmpC 168 Service and Food Workers Union Nga Ringa Tota Inc v Sanford Ltd [pdf, 185 KB]

   ...the Act. This entitles the plaintiff to “a full hearing of the entire matter” which was before the Authority. The “matter” that was before the Authority was whether it should accept the Union’s referral to facilitation. This is not an appeal in the traditional sense of an examination of the correctness of the Authority’s decision on the facts before it. Rather, a party electing to challenge by hearing de novo is entitled to a consideration of the “matter” (whether...

6. [2013] NZEmpC 28 Maori Hill & Balmacewen Pharmacy Ltd v O’Sullivan [pdf, 205 KB]

   ...not satisfied that she was dismissed by Mr Vohora on 3 May or at a later date. I do however consider that Ms O’Sullivan was unjustifiably constructively dismissed. [44] In Auckland Shop Employees Union v Woolworths (NZ) Ltd, 4 the Court of Appeal identified the following categories of constructive dismissal: (a) The employer gives the employee a choice between resigning or being dismissed; (b) The employer embarks on a course of conduct with the deliberate and dominant pur...

7. CAC20003 v Wright [2015] NZREADT 25 [pdf, 201 KB]

   ...course, but because the defendant’s concerning conduct is not real estate work, we have no jurisdiction to find, or penalise for, unsatisfactory conduct. [83] 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 ____________________________...

8. The Māori Trustee - Poike 8E (2015) 101 Waikato Maniapoto MB 286 (101 WMN 286) [pdf, 272 KB]

   ...debt is satisfied; t) These interests, rights and duties are substantive interests, rights and duties that crystallised on commencement of the legislation in 1987 and are preserved by s 17(1)(b) of the Interpretation Act 1999; u) The Court of Appeal discussed s 18 of the Interpretation Act 1999 in Foodstuffs (Auckland) Limited v Commerce Commission, 18 and qualified its application to where there are existing (vested) interests, rights and duties at the time of the repeal, com...

9. [2014] NZEmpC 74 NZ Aluminimum Smelters Ltd v Weller Ors [pdf, 111 KB]

   ...intention which they clearly could not have had. The natural and ordinary meaning should not lead to a conclusion that flouts business common sense. [32] I acknowledge Mr Jagose’s submission that this summary was adopted by the Court of Appeal in the context of construing an employment agreement.8 5 At [19]. That must 6At [23]. 7At [61] citing Investors Compensation Scheme Ltd v West Bromwich Building Society (No 1) [1998]...

10. CAC 20004 V Lindsay [2013] NZREADT 113 [pdf, 178 KB]

    ...$2,000 could be appropriate. We ask the Registrar to arrange a telephone conference with our Chairperson and the parties to discuss procedure towards penalty. [88] 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 ______________________________ Ms N Dangen Member ______________________________...