Search Results

1. [2019] NZEmpC 23 Rachelle v Air New Zealand Ltd [pdf, 437 KB]

   ...particulars were declined. Air NZ now seeks to strike out the pleadings about breaches of the “Privacy Law Act within the workplace” and “unlawful dismissal”. Ms Rachelle opposed this application. In doing so, her submissions included a request that the causes of action previously struck out be reinstated. [6] The grounds of this application are that, in relation to both pleadings, the personal grievances to which they relate were not raised within 90 days as is require...

2. National Standards Committee 1 v Yang [2024] NZLCDT 8 (27 March 2024) [pdf, 160 KB]

   ...Yang] with weekly DJ lessons.” Mr Yang agrees he had one such lesson. But, in an unsworn “statement of evidence” provided to the Standards Committee in April 2023, Mr Yang said5: “I most certainly did not agree to receive DJ lessons as a form of payment for legal services to [the client].” [11] The client offered inconsistent accounts about the DJ contra proposition. After Mr Yang had ceased acting for the client, and after Mr Yang made his claims in the Disputes Tr...

3. Fong v Accident Compensation Corporation (Suspension of entitlements) [2025] NZACC 004 (13 January 2025) [pdf, 239 KB]

   ...Corporation seek confirmation from Mr Schweder that Mr Fong’s personal injuries are no longer the cause of his incapacity and more likely than not due to multilevel spondylosis that predated his accident on 6 May 2021. [39] The Corporation then requested an opinion from Mr Schweder which was difficult to obtain due to the pressures on his practice at the time. While Mr Schweder convened a telehealth consultation with Mr Fong and discussed treatment options, he did not provide a...

4. LCRO 24/2020 TN v [Area] Standards Committee [X] (30 November 2020) [pdf, 210 KB]

   ...of that process, and the Committee’s subsequent resumption of its process in April 2019. The Committee’s decision records that in the meantime: On 24 August 2018, Judge VH released a copy of the 23 November 2017 letter following an earlier request by [the Committee]. Mr TN did not take the opportunity offered by the Committee to file further submissions after the own motion inquiry resumed, and the decision recording that there had been unsatisfactory conduct on his part was is...

5. NX v HD [2024] NZDT 233 (28 March 2024) [pdf, 196 KB]

   ...to whether a further building could be included, which it could not, so they did not stand to gain financially from the survey result, or fees expended; and d. I considered whether the D’s could be said to have benefitted from the additional information gained, even though it did not prove beneficial, but even so, I am not satisfied that this outcome has resulted in unjust enrichment. 15. As I find that there was no contract, and no quasi-contract resulting in unjust enrichment, it...

6. Re Puia (Rejection of Statement of Claim) [2023] NZHRRT 29 [pdf, 158 KB]

   ...DATE OF DECISION: 25 September 2023 DECISION OF TRIBUNAL THAT INTENDED STATEMENT OF CLAIM NOT BE ACCEPTED FOR FILING1 [1] On 26 April 2023, Ms Puia presented for filing in the Tribunal a statement of claim (on the official claim form) purportedly filed under s 98 of the Privacy Act 2020 (the Act). [2] The form on page 5 after Step 3 states: Please tick the boxes that apply to you (refer to the relevant Certificate or notice given by the Privacy Commissioner or [if ap...

7. HK & QK v JF Ltd [2023] NZDT 334 (26 May 2023) [pdf, 123 KB]

   ...is set-off against the unpaid balance of invoices of $3493.70, represented by JF Ltd’s counter-claim, leaving an amount for JF Ltd to pay to HK and QK of $5021.38. Referee Perfect Date: 26 May 2023 Page 4 of 4 Information for Parties Rehearings You can apply for a rehearing if you believe that something prevented the proper decision from being made: for example, the relevant information was not available at the time. If you wish to apply for a rehe...

8. Algie & Ors v ACC [2013] NZACA 1 [pdf, 118 KB]

   ...BEFORE THE ACCIDENT COMPENSATION APPEAL AUTHORITY R Bedford HEARING at Wellington on 7 & 9 November 2012 APPEARANCES/COUNSEL Mr J Miller for appellant Mr P McBride for respondent DECISION Introduction [1] The appeal is brought as a form of class or representative action under the aegis of the named appellant and 20 other appellants in respect of retrospective claims for backdated attendant care payments under the 1972 and 1982 Acts. [2] At the Authority’s direct...

9. NB v UJ Ltd [2021] NZDT 1498 (23 April 2021) [pdf, 187 KB]

   ...hearing Mr S argued that NB was aware that there were works taking place on the road and had not made a reasonable effort to protect his assets. Mr S pointed out that there were two flyers sent to property owners by Fulton Hogan and Auckland Transport informing them of the work. He also argued that it is common knowledge and NB ought to have been aware that concrete pouring could cause harm, and taken steps to keep his business assets safe. 10. The flyers inform residents that work on...

10. BC v GN [2021] NZDT 1674 (28 November 2021) [pdf, 203 KB]

    ...BC. 4. The issues I must decide are: a. What terms were agreed? b. Was the contract frustrated? c. Is BC entitled to $581.00 as claimed, or to any other sum? What terms were agreed? 5. Under contract law, a legally binding contract is formed when both parties intend to contract on agreed terms and intend for those terms to be legally binding. The terms of a contract are formed at the beginning, not at the end, and what was agreed is looked at objectively, i.e., by looking...