Search Results

1. Frankpitt v Accident Compensation Corporation (Leave to appeal) [2022] NZACC 200 [pdf, 218 KB]

   ...concluded that with no primary decision having been made by the Corporation as to whether Mr Frankpitt had deemed cover, that was the extent of the Reviewer’s jurisdiction; and there was no unreasonable delay by the Corporation in processing claims by Mr Frankpitt for entitlements. The Court dismissed the appeal against the Reviewer’s decision, for the reasons outlined below. 1 Frankpitt v Accident Compensation Corporation (Deemed [2022] NZACC 98. 2 Background [...

2. Harland v ACC [2012] NZACA 6 [pdf, 408 KB]

   ...APPEARANCES/COUNSEL Peter Nee Harland for appellant Paul McBride for respondent DECISION: APPLICATION TO REINSTATE APPEAL [1] The application is to reinstate the appeal filed under ACA No. 02/05 (the appeal) that Mr Nee Harland withdrew on the applicant's behalf on 14 March 2007. [2] The appeal was against a review decision dated 20 February 2003 (the review U"(J1:;lllJl~,,-::::;:::-~ which in turn was against the Corporation's decision made on 1 0 March 2003 (the d...

3. [2013] NZEmpC 192 Gupta v Infosys Technologies (Australia) Pty Ltd [pdf, 113 KB]

   ...WELLINGTON [2013] NZEmpC 192 [18 October 2013] IN THE EMPLOYMENT COURT WELLINGTON [2013] NZEmpC 192 WRC 35/12 IN THE MATTER OF a challenge to a determination of the Employment Relations Authority AND IN THE MATTER of an application for an order striking out amended statement of claim BETWEEN NEEL GUPTA Plaintiff AND INFOSYS TECHNOLOGIES (AUSTRALIA) PTY LIMITED Defendant Hearing: (by memorandum filed on 25 September 20...

4. [2022] NZEmpC 120 Smiths City (Southern) Ltd (in receivership) v Claxton [pdf, 273 KB]

   ...NEW ZEALAND CHRISTCHURCH I TE KŌTI TAKE MAHI O AOTEAROA ŌTAUTAHI [2022] NZEmpC 120 EMPC 413/2019 EMPC 444/2019 IN THE MATTER OF matters removed from the Employment Relations Authority AND IN THE MATTER OF an application for costs BETWEEN SMITHS CITY (SOUTHERN) LIMITED (IN RECEIVERSHIP) Plaintiff AND JEREMY WALTER ETTLES CLAXTON First Defendant AND CANDO CREATIVE FLOORING LIMITED Second Defendant AND...

5. LM v TT [2022] NZDT 166 (2 November 2022) [pdf, 109 KB]

   ...understanding of both parties that it was non-refundable. 14. I find the deposit is refundable because it has not been proved it was non-refundable. In addition, it is not usual for a deposit to be sought or paid until an unconditional contract has been formed. An enforceable contract was not formed because any agreements there might have been were not committed to paper in a Sale and Purchase Agreement as is required by law. 15. I find that Mr TT is entitled to retain $1,265.0...

6. NB v B Ltd [2024] NZDT 7 (27 February 2024) [pdf, 88 KB]

   CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 2 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 7 APPLICANT NB RESPONDENT B Ltd The Tribunal orders: The claim is dismissed. Reasons 1. NB had a contract of insurance with B Ltd which was issued in December 2018. He made a claim in October 2022 for an injury (over 2 years before) he says he incurred to his back when he was pushing a car in June 2020. B Ltd declined his claim saying he...

7. Naidu v Royal Australasian College of Surgeons [2018] NZHRRT 23 [pdf, 252 KB]

   ...April 2018 DATE OF LAST SUBMISSIONS: 25 May 2018 (plaintiff) 1 June 2018 (defendant) 7 June 2018 (plaintiff) DATE OF DECISION: 14 June 2018 DECISION OF TRIBUNAL1 INTRODUCTION [1] On 10 August 2015 Dr Naidu addressed a request to the Royal Australasian College of Surgeons (RACS) for access to the personal information which RACS then held about 1 [This decision is to be cited as: Naidu v Royal Australasian College...

8. Waxman v Pal (Costs) [2017] NZHRRT 3 [pdf, 162 KB]

   ...AT AUCKLAND BEFORE: Mr RPG Haines QC, Chairperson Ms LJ Alaeinia, Member Mr BK Neeson JP, Member REPRESENTATION: Dr D Waxman in person Dr J Pal in person DATE OF COSTS HEARING: Heard on the papers DATE OF DECISION ON APPLICATION FOR COSTS: 25 January 2017 DECISION OF TRIBUNAL ON APPLICATION BY DEFENDANT FOR COSTS 1 Introduction [1] In Waxman v Pal [2016] NZHRRT 28 (11 August 2016) the Tribunal found there had been no interference by Dr Pal w...

9. [2023] NZEmpC 38 Halse v Employment Relations Authority [pdf, 151 KB]

   ...HALSE v EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS AUTHORITY [2023] NZEmpC 38 [15 March 2023] IN THE EMPLOYMENT COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND I TE KŌTI TAKE MAHI O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU [2023] NZEmpC 38 EMPC 394/2021 IN THE MATTER OF an application for judicial review AND IN THE MATTER OF an application for a stay BETWEEN ALLAN HALSE Applicant AND EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS AUTHORITY First Respondent AND RANGIURA TRUST BOARD Second Re...

10. M Ltd v SN & LL [2023] NZDT 742 (13 December 2023) [pdf, 204 KB]

    CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2023] NZDT 742 APPLICANT M Ltd RESPONDENT SECOND RESPONDENT SN LL The Tribunal orders: LL and SN must pay M Ltd $2,466.00 by 4pm on 17 January 2024. Reasons: 1. The applicant is a mortgage broker and arranged mortgage financing for the respondents with a third party lender. The respondents moved their mortgage finance to an...