Search Results

1. [2021] NZREADT 54 – Complaints Assessment Committee 2106 v Mathers (6 December 2021) [pdf, 257 KB]

   ...simpler, speedier, cheaper and more accessible justice than the ordinary courts. It found that the imposition of adverse costs orders should not undermine the important advantages of tribunals over courts. Furthermore, because of the consumer protection focus of the Act, access to the Tribunal should not be unduly deterred. There was a need for a flexible approach. [24] In Kooiman, the Tribunal found that the unsuccessful appellant had participated in good faith and had not delay...

2. NZCVS-Cycle-4-Core-Report-The-NZCVS-and-Cycle-4-key-findings-fin.pdf [pdf, 466 KB]

   ...the work to New Zealand Ministry of Justice and abide by the other licence terms. Please note you may not use any departmental or governmental emblem, logo, or coat of arms in any way that infringes any provision of the Flags, Emblems, and Names Protection Act 1981. Use the wording “New Zealand Ministry of Justice” in your attribution. Do not use the New Zealand Ministry of Justice logo. If you have any feedback or questions about NZCVS results, please email us on nzcvs@justice....

3. [2022] NZACC 012 - LB v Accident Compensation Corporation (Mental Injury) [pdf, 233 KB]

   ...sexual abuse. The Corporation sought further information from the appellant’s GP, but, because that information was not forthcoming, the claim was declined on 2 June 2010. [5] On 27 April 2011, the Corporation received GP notes from a Health Care centre as well as a medical certificate from Dr Nathan Joseph, GP, requesting an impairment assessment. [6] On 5 May 2011, the Corporation issued a decision declining the lump sum/independence allowance application on the basis that it...

4. McLennan v Accident Compensation Corporation (Gradual Process Injury) [2023] NZACC 54 [pdf, 254 KB]

   ...measured in the work environment was too low to be associated with injury. Unfortunately, this relates only to a general statistical measure, and takes no account of individual’s sensitivities. It is notable in the work environment that there was no protective clothing, and masks to provide respiratory filters. Therefore, and whatever the air concentration showed, there is no specific measure of personal exposure. While it is second-hand information, the information is neverthel...

5. Collective impact toolbox [pdf, 2 MB]

   ...idea? How can you influence them? What are their concerns? What features of your idea will appeal? How will risk be minimised? People feel loss more acutely than gain, even for the same objective amount. Show people how their interests will still be protected if things go wrong. Who are the other stakeholders? Who would the idea affect? What would they say to decision makers? Do any of them have close links to influential decision makers? Can you adapt your idea to cover their concerns?...

6. [2019] NZEmpC 153 Savage v Wai Shing Ltd [pdf, 545 KB]

   ...This would include cutting and clearing unwanted plants down to ground level, then applying a weed killer. The second aspect of the job was to use a knapsack sprayer to spray smaller unwanted plant species. Mr Savage was directed to wear protective clothing. It was stated that there was no requirement for him to attend the company’s office or come onto company property outside of normal working hours. [38] There is a dispute between the parties as to how long he woul...

7. [2020] NZEmpC 222 Flashoff v New Zealand Technology Group Hawkes Bay Ltd [pdf, 311 KB]

   HAIG DAVID CHARLES FLASHOFF v NEW ZEALAND TECHNOLOGY GROUP HAWKES BAY LIMITED [2020] NZEmpC 222 [9 December 2020] IN THE EMPLOYMENT COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WELLINGTON I TE KŌTI TAKE MAHI O AOTEAROA TE WHANGANUI-A-TARA [2020] NZEmpC 222 EMPC 319/2020 IN THE MATTER OF a challenge to a determination of the Employment Relations Authority BETWEEN HAIG DAVID CHARLES FLASHOFF First Plaintiff AND DONALD PETER PRICE Second Plaintiff AND RAYMON

8. Waitangi Tribunal - District 13 Part 2 Northern South Island [pdf, 1.1 MB]

   RA N G A H A U A WH A N U I DI S T R I C T 13 THE NORTHERN SOUTH ISLAND DR G A PHILLIPSON PA R T I I OC T O B E R 1996 WO R K I N G PA P E R : FI R S T RE L E A S E WAITANGI TRIBUNAL RANGAHAUA WHANUI SERIES Other reports in the Rangahaua Whanui Series available: District 1: Auckland, R Daamen, P Hamer, and B Rigby District 7: The Volcanic Plateau, B J Bargh District 9: The Whanganui District, S Cross and B Bargh District 11a: Wairarapa, P Goldsmith District 11b: Hawke’s Bay, D Cowi

9. [2011] NZEmpC 96 Snowdon v Radio New Zealand Ltd [pdf, 177 KB]

   ...that the plaintiff had consulted her on 6 July 2011 as symptoms of the depression and PTSD from which she had suffered in the past were returning. It further stated that her current unwellness was caused by a combination of stress associated with caring for a much loved terminally ill mother and the impending Court case. In deference to the plaintiff’s current state of health, and because her mother may only have months to live, Dr Sawrey respectfully suggested that the hearing b...

10. Leef v Leef - Panguru A47B (2015) 113 Taitokerau MB 11 (113 TTK 11) [pdf, 250 KB]

    ...“PVC reservoir and sanitary sewerage disposal unit, septic tank and soakage fields and connection pipes to the building is excluded from the sale” (sic). These were to be left in the land. Other clauses addressed the fact that Robert was to take care of all permits etc for removal of the house and was to be responsible for protecting other improvements on the land. [29] Robert paid the purchase price but did not remove the house. It remains there today. Instead, Robert say...