Search Results

1. LCRO 57/2018 G RC and D RC v YS (30 April 2019) [pdf, 335 KB]

   ...available”. [23] The Committee concluded that Mr YS “acted appropriately in the termination of the retainer” having received the report from Dr EF, who had been appointed by the Family Court, to assess Mrs RC’s mental capacity. (2) Request for Mrs RC’s files, records (a) Mr G, as attorney [24] The Committee accepted that “it was arguable” that Mr YS “was entitled to refuse to provide” Mrs RC’s files to Mr G when Mr G’s conduct, as Mrs RC’s attorney, wa...

2. Tane v Accident Compensation Corporation (Personal Injury) [2025] NZDC 36 (27 February 2025) [pdf, 228 KB]

   ...June 2021, a review application was filed against Wellnz’s decisions. 5 [16] On 22 September 2021, Ms Tane’s then advocate emailed Wellnz, noting that Mr Van Nieuwenhuizen had referred to a L5/S1 facet joint injury. The email formally requested that Wellnz issue a cover decision in regard to that diagnosis. In the meantime, the review application for the earlier decisions stood adjourned. [17] On 27 October 2021, Dr Courtenay Kenny, Occupational Specialist, having conduct...

3. LCRO 52/2022 AD v OC (12 July 2024) [pdf, 244 KB]

   ...the time. The respondent issued four invoices for his work, dated 31 August 2020, 30 September 2020, 30 October 2020 and 27 November 2020. The applicant paid the first invoice. [18] In February 2021, in response to receipt of a statement and request for payment from the firm, the applicant requested that the other three invoices be “put on hold” until his dispute with the Council was resolved, so that the applicant could ascertain what the respondent’s alleged conduct in m...

4. [2014] NZEmpC 153 Roy v BOT of Tamaki College [pdf, 131 KB]

   ...circumstances, Mr Roy elected to await the provision to him of a copy of the Board’s report to the NZTC which it was obliged statutorily to make “immediately” following his resignation with effect from 11 October 2010. [33] Although Mr Roy did not request the Board to provide to him its reasons for the actions which he says amounted to his constructive dismissal (pursuant to s 120 of the Act), what he did subsequently was tantamount to doing so. From 30 September 2010 Mr Ro...

5. Moriori Claims Settlement bill [pdf, 106 KB]

   ...with articles 14 and 27 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which are comparable to ss 20 and 27(2) of the Bill of Rights Act.3 Exclusion of remedy of compensation 9. Clause 24(3) of the Bill excludes damages and other forms of monetary compensation as a remedy for any failure by the Crown to comply with a protocol under the Bill. 10. This clause may be seen to raise the issue of consistency with s 27(3) of the Bill of Rights Act, namely the right to bring ci...

6. [2011] NZEmpC 68 Army Surplus Disposals Ltd v Reed [pdf, 110 KB]

   ...produce this book to the Authority. (d) Mr Doyle claimed he could provide further evidence that Mr Reed received the money alleged if he was given time. The Authority Member allowed Mr Doyle 10 days following the investigation to provide this information but he failed to do so. [5] The determination records findings and orders as follows: [7] By operating its business on a cash basis, without documentation, the respondent has put itself in a vulnerable position. In the absence...

7. Hearn v Parklane Investments Limited [pdf, 45 KB]

   ...comply with an order for discovery, a notice for further particulars, a notice for interrogatories, or other similar requirement under these rules; or (v) failing, without reasonable justification, to accept an offer of settlement whether in the form of an offer under rule 14.10 or some other offer to settle or dispose of the proceeding; … 24. The claimant states that items (i), (ii) and (iii) above cover the Council’s behaviour in question. 25. The claimant also refer...

8. Jarvie & Ors v Accident Compensation Corporation (Reviewable decision) [2025] NZACC 41 (5 March 2025) [pdf, 273 KB]

   ...dated 19 March 2018 stating that the Corporation’s letter had not addressed any of the claimants’ concerns. Further, none of the claimants had responded to the letter as they were not sure why they had to provide the additional information requested. [8] The Corporation responded on 10 April 2018 advising: Each situation is assessed on the client’s individual circumstances and needs and therefore information is requested from the client in order for ACC to understand both...

9. Gorgus v Corrections [2023] NZHRRT 22 [pdf, 316 KB]

   ...interference with Mr Gorgus’ privacy. Corrections has appropriately accepted this, as it failed to acknowledge or action either of those requests as required by PA, ss 40 and 66(4), without any proper basis. It is to that interference that any claimed causation must attach when the question of remedies is considered in relation to the First Request and Second Request. WHETHER CORRECTIONS HAS GOOD REASONS FOR WITHHOLDING OR REDACTING PERSONAL INFORMATION [32] Corrections submits tha...

10. [2014] NZEmpC 53 NZ Meatworkers Union v Alliance Group Ltd [pdf, 184 KB]

    ...not pursue the claims vigorously after 2006 because they only affected a minority of the Union’s members and because similar issues were then before the courts. [18] Although the substance of the annual holidays provisions did not change, the form of them was tidied up by the removal in the 2008/2009 agreement of the first paragraph of cl 9(g)(ii). Thus, the provision which must be construed and applied in this case is: (g) The provisions of the Holidays Act 2003 and any Act pa...