Search Results

1. [2011] NZEmpC 102 Broughton v Microsoft NZ Ltd second interlocutory [pdf, 68 KB]

   ...is similarly a broad outline of strategy which does not refer to the plaintiff but nevertheless probably covers what was intended to happen to him. [6] The foregoing documents, both individually and collectively, do not appear to amount to a request for legal and human resources advice about a proposed strategy. Rather, they set out the strategy, or at least parts of it, itself. It is necessary in these circumstances to then consider what Ms Doherty, whose affidavit supports the c...

2. [2020] NZEmpC 67 Maddigan v Director-General of Conservation [pdf, 312 KB]

   ...the defendant in full within a period of 14 days of the date of this judgment. [6] Mr Maddigan asks for an order that he be paid out his accrued long service leave (equivalent to 15 days). The Director-General of Conservation opposes this request on two grounds. I deal with them in reverse order. [7] The second argument is that cl 3.4 of the collective agreement effectively prevents any payment. That provision states that an employee is entitled to long service leave on compl...

3. [2010] NZEmpC 79 Silver Fern Farms Ltd v North [pdf, 50 KB]

   ...position as here. Mr Mitchell’s argument would advance the case for employees a step further. Wyatt says that not only must there be an awareness of the act or omission but the 90 day period does not begin to run until the employee considers (forms a “reasonable belief”) that the employer’s action was unjustifiable. Mr Mitchell’s argument goes one step further, however, and would have three necessary constituents: the awareness or appreciation of the act or omission, th...

4. Wolverhampton v Shaftesbury LCRO 145 / 2009 (23 June 2010) [pdf, 170 KB]

   ...been posted nor had it been placed in an envelope. The Standards Committee informed the Practitioner accordingly. [4] The Practitioner wrote again to the Standards Committee on 15 June 2009 challenging the truthfulness of the Applicant‟s claim that she did not know how the document came to be in her letter box. He contended that she had found the document among her papers and had herself placed it there. He reiterated his earlier stance that the Applicant had the document a...

5. [2018] NZEmpC 88 Lorigan v Infinity Automotive Ltd [pdf, 321 KB]

   ...the other. [13] On 14 April 2009, an IEA was signed between Perry’s and Mr Lorigan, backdated so as to be effective from 24 March 2009. As will be discussed later, Mr Lorigan pleaded that this document was signed under duress, and he now informs the Court that he considers it to be void. [14] On 31 May 2009, Perry’s amalgamated under Part 13 of the Companies Act 1993 (the CA) with two other companies in the Sime Darby Group. The evidence is that as a consequence of the am...

6. Bridge v The Real Estate Agents Authority (CAC 409) and Edwards [2018] NZREADT 61 [pdf, 312 KB]

   ...vendors on 6 May 2016. She referred to the hole in the chip heater flue, the lack of hot water in the laundry, and the garage spouting (describing it as “buggered”). She did not refer to the fence. [7] On 9 May, Mr Bridge’s solicitors requested a price reduction of $7,500 from the vendors’ solicitors: … Our client put in an offer on a “sight unseen” basis, relying upon representations by the agent. A building report has identified that the property is not concr...

7. AU v ACC (Personal Injury) [2024] NZACC 098 [pdf, 466 KB]

   ...June 2024 Held at: Wellington by AVL Appearances: The Appellant is self-represented J Sumner for the Accident Compensation Corporation (“the Corporation”) Judgment: 12 June 2024 RESERVED JUDGMENT OF JUDGE P R SPILLER [Claims for personal injury - ss 20, 25, 26, Accident Compensation Act 2001 (“the Act”)] Introduction [1] This is an appeal from the decision of a Reviewer dated 12 June 2023. The Reviewer dismissed applications for review of: 2...

8. CE v DT LCRO 281 / 2011 (30 September 2013) [pdf, 107 KB]

   ...decision have been changed. DECISION Introduction [1] The Standards Committee made a finding of unsatisfactory conduct against lawyer CE (the Practitioner) by reason of his failing to have provided his client, DT (the Respondent), with information in keeping with his obligations under Chapter 3 of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008 (the Rules). This concerned his failure to have provided the Respondent with a Letter of Engagement....

9. Andrews v Accident Compensation Corporation (Leave to appeal to the High Court) [2025] NZACC 45 (10 March 2025) [pdf, 231 KB]

   ...[15] Meanwhile, Mr Andrews sought advice from Mr Boyle, Orthopaedic Surgeon. Mr Boyle filed an assessment report and treatment plan (ARTP) requesting surgery funding in January 2021. The ARTP referenced the March 2005 accident. [16] The surgery requested was considered by Dr Fong, Principal Clinical Advisor. On 4 February 2021, the Corporation approved surgery funding. At that stage, cover was updated to cover biceps tendinitis, a glenoid labrum tear, and a closed fracture of the...

10. FG Ltd v SB & ID Ltd [2023] NZDT 173 (7 June 2023) [pdf, 120 KB]

    ...previous days driving on that road he had not hit it. He rang and reported the incident. 10. ST said both respondents had a duty to maintain the roads or to warn motorists of potholes like this. 11. ST said he asked SB for months to give him information about its inspection of this stretch of road and it ignored him. Inspection reports were produced at the second hearing and indicate that stretch of road was the subject of an inspection 4 days earlier by ID Ltd. The report does not...