Search Results

1. [2019] NZEmpC 178 Johnston v The Fletcher Construction Co Ltd [pdf, 340 KB]

   ...implementing an enterprise resource planning system known as the JD Edwards (JDE) software system. [8] The company’s decision to proceed with the proposal was communicated to Mr Johnston in a letter on 24 June 2016. At the same time he was informed that his job as Financial Controller was to continue until the JDE implementation affected his business unit at which point a “transition into the new structure” would occur. [9] Three days later, on 27 June 2016, Mr Johnston...

2. Gwak and Kim TRI-2020-100-006 [2024] NZWHT AUCKLAND 01 [pdf, 237 KB]

   ...house. [7] The relevant Act applying to this case is the Building Act 1991. All steps occurred before the passing of the new Building Act 2004. Compass Building Certification Limited [8] Compass was a corporate certifier, authorised to perform regulatory functions under s 51 of the Building Act 1991. It was audited by the BIA.1 It had quality manuals. It achieved annual renewals of its licence. 1 BIA was the Building Industry Authority responsible for, inter alia, re...

3. LCRO 122/2015 NP v AO (21 May 2018) [pdf, 178 KB]

   ...they cost a lot of money”. [10] She and others met Mr AO at Ms T’s home later that day, obtained a key from the neighbour, and undertook “a brief perusal of her effects”. [11] Mrs NP says that when she asked Mr AO later for further information to assist her and her siblings in Australia in possibly making a claim, he did not respond and continued not to return her calls. 3 [12] Mrs NP and her siblings engaged a lawyer who corresponded with Mr AO in October 2014. M...

4. EG & SG v BT & MT [2024] NZDT 365 (18 June 2024) [pdf, 152 KB]

   CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 2 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2024] NZDT 365 APPLICANT EG and SG RESPONDENT BT and MT The Tribunal orders: The claim is struck out. Reasons [1] EG and SG claim that their neighbours, BT and MT, have erected screens in BT and MT’s property near the parties’ joint fence. EG and SG find these unattractive and aesthetically displeasing. EG and SG also object that BT and MT have...

5. LAP contract for services [pdf, 753 KB]

   ...comply with the procedure in the relevant policy, including any requirements to inform the Secretary and find a replacement. 5. Secretary’s obligations 5.1. The Secretary will, once the Secretary has all relevant information that has been requested from the Provider, promptly: 5.1.1. make decisions relating to Approvals 5.1.2. objectively and fairly deal with Legal Aid Complaints in accordance with clause 9 of this Contract, the Complaints Management policy in the Provider...

6. [2006] NZEmpC AC 73/06 CE Bay of Plenty DHB v NZ PSA [pdf, 75 KB]

   ...contents in seeking solicitor/client costs against the PSA… [7] The letter was faxed to the defendant on the same day. [8] On 30 August 2004, 10.37am the Board’s solicitors received a copy of a letter the PSA had forwarded to the Authority, requesting an extension of time for filing and serving briefs of evidence, to Wednesday, 1 September 2004. At this time the Board had received no response from the PSA to its letter of 26 August. [9] By facsimile dated 30 Augus...

7. [2016] NZEmpC 1 Kilpatrick v Air New Zealand Ltd [pdf, 252 KB]

   ...and the ISC. When they would not agree with Ms Kilpatrick’s interpretation, she stated that she was going to lodge an Operations Occurrence Report (OOR) against her supervising flight attendants in any event. The Captain and the First Officer formed the view that Ms Kilpatrick had it in for Ms Coyle and was intent on causing her trouble. During evidence these matters were not in fact denied by Ms Kilpatrick, although she claims that she did not breach policy by going on to the...

8. EE v D Ltd & G Ltd [2024] NZDT 862 (9 December 2024) [pdf, 221 KB]

   ...manifested only very occasionally. Any issue could reasonably be expected to show itself more often. e. I have considered the fact that [a friend] and NU were topping up coolant in the vehicle, and that this may have masked any issue. However no information is available as to how often and how much the vehicle was topped up by and so this offers no support to the allegations that have been made. Did D Ltd provide its services with reasonable care and skill? 11. The relevant l...

9. LCRO 210/2018 RF v TG (27 August 2020) [pdf, 231 KB]

   ...plead causes of action that were not in fact open to Ms TG to plead. [27] Mr RF argued that it was unreasonable for him to be criticised for making submissions on costs at the conclusion of the ERA hearing. He notes that he had made specific request of Ms TG as to whether she wished for him to provide submissions and had been instructed to do so. Further, Mr RF considered that the costs assessor had underestimated the costs involved in preparing the costs submission. 6 Natur...

10. [2010] NZEmpC 154 Villegas v Visypak (NZ) Ltd [pdf, 68 KB]

    ...also a union delegate. His terms and conditions were contained in the Visypak (NZ) Ltd Collective Employment Agreement 2008-2011 (the CA). [4] On 5 September 2008 he received a written warning for an incident on his fork hoist that Visypak claimed should have been reported as a near miss. It found that he had driven across a wet floor in such a manner that he had lost control of the fork hoist, slid sideways and nearly struck a mobile floor scrubber that was being driven by a...