Search Results

1. [2012] NZEmpC 83 George v Auckland Council [pdf, 95 KB]

   ...elevate an incident of relatively minor misconduct to an offence of serious misconduct by electing to not believe the employee’s explanation. If that was lawful then the effect would be the routine circumvention by employers of the statutory protection employees have against unjustified dismissal under the Employment Relations Act 2000. That is, it would be a very simple matter for employers to summarily dismiss their employees for any minor incident of alleged misconduct and...

2. [2012] NZEmpC 91 Ball v Healthcare of NZ Ltd [pdf, 132 KB]

   ...application within three years of raising a grievance with her employer. As the Authority member noted, had she done so immediately following receipt of the information pack she would have been well within the three year time limit. He concluded, after carefully considering each of the relevant considerations, that the balance of justice weighed against the grant of an extension of time. [17] The Authority member adopted an entirely conventional approach to determining whether...

3. Recording Industry Association of New Zealand v Teleom NZ 2592 [2013] NZCOP 1 [pdf, 75 KB]

   ...of $1.79/$2.39 each.” [21] The Applicant submits that the proper approach is for the Tribunal to read r.12(2)(a)(i) as giving it a mandate to “determine a sum” with reference to the reasonable cost of purchasing a copy of the work. After careful consideration of this issue, the Tribunal is unable to accept the Applicant’s submission. The Tribunal considers that the number of downloads flowing from a work being uploaded is not relevant to the Tribunal’s determination under r...

4. [2016] NZEmpC 16 Best Health Products Ltd v Nee [pdf, 172 KB]

   ...only partially successful, it ought to have a contribution to the costs it had incurred, which were said to amount to over $18,000 plus GST. [8] The Authority found that it was understandable that Ms Nee had wanted to be certain that she could protect herself from the employer’s claims, although they were completely fanciful; allowance for that factor was provided for in fixing costs. The Authority also held that there was simply no evidence that BHPL had incurred $18,000 plus...

5. CAC 10054 v Subritzky [2012] NZREADT 19 [pdf, 129 KB]

   ...messages originated from my phone, in no way am I admitting that I am the author of those text messages. I would also like you to take into account when considering my case: a. My unblemished record to date within the real estate industry, a career spanning nearly a decade and hundreds of vendors and buyers, something that I could not accomplish especially over the last few difficult years if I acted unprofessionally in any manner.” The Evidence [6] The complainant, Mr Ste...

6. Bidois v Trustees of Te Rimu Trust - Tokata A14 and other blocks (2013) 31 Tarawhiti MB 95 (31 TRW 95) [pdf, 150 KB]

   ...facilitator. I note Mr Akuhata-Brown’s comment at the hearing that he might contemplate filing an application for the 31 Tairawhiti MB 100 removal of trustees. As I also underscored at the hearing, it would be prudent for all trustees to carefully consider involving the trust in further litigation without exhausting all other avenues to attempt to settle any issues that may remain unresolved. Certainly the trustees can seek the directions of the Court from time to time...

7. AL v ZO LCRO 24 / 2010 (27 August 2010) [pdf, 100 KB]

   ...conflict „event‟ (discovery of the access problem) arose about 10 days prior to the scheduled settlement. The Practitioner ought then to have recognised that a conflict existed, and taken steps to ensure that the interests of both parties were protected. There was sufficient time to have arranged for the parties to have obtained independent legal advice as to their positions, and to have reached a basis for settlement. [23] There is no evidence to indicate that the Practitio...

8. JM v AHX [2011] NZIACDT 2 (21 January 2011) [pdf, 104 KB]

   ...advisers carry professional obligations. They are personally responsible for the professional relationship, regardless of whether they are employees, or otherwise. [28] The purpose of the Act is set out in section 3, and it includes promoting and protecting the interests of consumers receiving immigration advice. [29] In this case, the Adviser allowed himself to be one of the two licensed advisers in the professional relationship with the Complainant. It follows he is responsible, alo...

9. [2018] NZEmpC 34 Matsuoka v LSG Sky Chefs NZ Ltd [pdf, 300 KB]

   ...Network Ltd [2002] 16 PRNZ 747 (CA). which the claim has little chance of success. Access to the courts for a genuine plaintiff is not lightly to be denied. [16] Of course, the interests of defendants must also be weighed. They must be protected against being drawn into unjustified litigation, particularly where it is over-complicated and unnecessarily protracted. [23] From the documents filed in this matter, I am not satisfied that the defendant has demonstrated tha...

10. Takarangi v Owens - Hautu 2B1B2A No 3 - (2018) 383 Aotea MB 50 (383 AOT 50) [pdf, 371 KB]

    ...of interest of some $9,000. Once the results are known and notified to the Court then further directions will issue. The short point is that, in such circumstances, it is necessary that the current trustees and the Court ascertain and consider carefully the views of the owners before any final decisions as to the amount to distribute and the question of liability can be made. 9 Tupe Snr v Everton - Manunui No 1 4th Residue Ah...