Search Results

1. Balich v Standing [2012] NZIACDT 42 (24 August 2012) [pdf, 115 KB]

   ...the agreed services, Mr Balich says Mr Standing failed to refund the fees he had been paid. Mr Balich was put to the expense of making a new application after terminating Mr Standing’s engagement. [3] Mr Balich provided evidence to support his claim, and despite the Tribunal requesting that Mr Standing provide his records and deal with the complaint, Mr Standing has not responded. [4] The Tribunal has found the material before it supports the complaint, and it has been upheld. The...

2. [2024] NZEmpC 231Aurecon New Zealand Limited v Dowlut [pdf, 251 KB]

   ...days whilst further inquiries were made about her health. [53] Then Ms Dowlut resumed work, with the employer being satisfied that she could work and undertake disciplinary processes with appropriate support. At the same time, however, Aurecon requested any information Ms Dowlut wanted considered as part of the disciplinary process. Three weeks later, it attempted to restart the disciplinary process by inviting Ms Dowlut to a meeting. She declined to be involved thereafter, but...

3. L v EQC [2021] CEIT-2019-0036 [pdf, 411 KB]

   ...However, for reasons discussed below in paragraph [99], I need not consider that here. [31] Clause 3 goes no further than granting the discretion to not pay a “claim”. I note that “claim” is not defined by the Act. It may be argued that each request for payment is a “claim”, for the purposes of cl 3. However, this reading goes against the use of the word “claim” in a general insurance context, where a single claim, encapsulates all damage from each damage causing eve...

4. Te Manutukutuku 73 [pdf, 9.5 MB]

   ...inquiry. Judge Ambler’s widow, Te Tai Ambler, presented the report on behalf of the Tribunal to the deputy chair of the Maniapoto Māori Trust Board, Keith Ikin. The Tribunal issued these first two parts in advance of the full report in response to requests from the Crown and claimants for an early release of its findings on key issues. The title of the report, Te Mana Whatu Ahuru, was adopted from the term which, the Tribunal was told, Ngāti Maniapoto use for the power of ranga...

5. LCRO 160/2024 XT v YQ (27 June 2025) [pdf, 219 KB]

   ...[41] The Committee inquired into the course of events in the various court proceedings and set out its understanding of the relevant outcomes and effects of those proceedings and of the deeds. In doing so, it was clearly endeavouring to be as informative to the applicant as it could, given his misunderstandings of his own legal position and of the respondent’s responsibilities as executor and administrator of Mr X’s estate. [42] It found that the arguments the applicant sought to...

6. [2014] NZEmpC 169 Goulden v Capital and Coast District Health Board [pdf, 97 KB]

   ...out their respective views of the matter. [3] The facts are: a) On 7 July 2014, the plaintiff’s lawyers contacted the defendant’s lawyers asking whether they were authorised to accept service of the plaintiff’s statement of claim. By email of 7 July 2014, counsel for the defendant confirmed that she was so authorised. b) On the same day a letter was sent by signature-required courier from the plaintiff to the defendant, enclosing by way of service the statemen...

7. Bristol v Ngāti Rangi Trust - Rangiwaea-Tāpiri [2017] Chief Judge's MB 269 (2017 CJ 269) [pdf, 435 KB]

   ...Part No 6C and Rangipō Waiu 1B blocks.’ The Chief Surveyor had sought the application because the Crown 2017 Chief Judge’s MB 273 was seeking to use the land for a National Park. On 1 June 1960 the application was dismissed on the request of the Chief Surveyor. 3 [8] Less than a week later, on 7 June 1960, the application was reinstated. 4 At the 17 August 1960 hearing, evidence was given on behalf of Ngāti Waewae that they owned all the surrounding land and laid cl...

8. [2015] NZEmpC 234 2015 AFT v BCM [pdf, 294 KB]

   ...which were very arguably not made out in this case. I will come back to these. [50] This was not litigation brought repeatedly by the applicant against the respondent or others associated with it, whether plainly or dressed up in alternative forms or forums. It was a serious claim that was brought by the applicant, that he had been dismissed constructively and unjustifiably by his employer from professional employment. The applicant’s claims were that the employer respondent...

9. L v EQC [2022] CEIT-2019-0038 / 0044 [pdf, 221 KB]

   ...entirety. [13] The Declination Letters advised Ms L that should she not agree with the decision, that she could supply further information in support of her claims, and that EQC would reconsider its decision on receipt of such information. EQC requested that the amounts already paid out to Ms L for the emergency work claimed, be repaid to it. [14] The matter came to a head again two years later in 2015. In a letter to EQC dated 10 June 2015 Ms L offered to repay the amounts sough...

10. TEF v Grimshaw [2025] NZHRRT 33 [pdf, 398 KB]

    ...[6] On 1 February 2019 during a charter run the plaintiff and Mr Grimshaw had a conversation in which the plaintiff says he offered to get her the BB run in return for sex. The plaintiff says she was upset and unsure how to respond to his request for sex but decided to go along with it as she could not afford to lose her job or work hours. Mr Grimshaw denies offering to get the plaintiff the BB run in exchange for sex in that conversation, he says rather they discussed how a s...