Search Results

1. Review of the Courts Remote Participation Act 2010_Policy Approvals [pdf, 545 KB]

   ...excluded groups are more likely to be seniors, disabled people, people living in rural communities, people living in social housing, unemployed people, Pacific peoples and Māori. S9(2)(f)(iv) S9(2)(f) (iv) S9(2)(f)(iv) S9(2)(f)(iv) 11 Human Rights 50 I consider the proposals in this paper do not engage the Human Rights Act 1993, the Privacy Act 2020, or international treaty obligations. The proposals are consistent with NZBORA rights to a fair trial and to natural justic...

2. 2021-04-21 Transcript (up to end of day 20) [pdf, 5.9 MB]

   BEFORE THE ENVIRONMENT COURT AT CHRISTCHURCH ENV-2020-CHC-127 IN THE MATTER OF The Resource Management Act 1991 AND Of a notice of motion under section 149T(2) to decide proposed Plan Change 7 to the Regional Plan: Water for Otago (referred to the Environment Court by the Minister for the Environment under section 142(2)(b) of the Act) OTAGO REGIONAL COUNCIL Applicant Hearing Commenced: 12 April 2021 held in Cromwell Court: Environ

3. [2010] NZEmpc 111 Smith v Stokes Valley Pharmacy (2009) Limited [pdf, 126 KB]

   ...their concerns about her work performance and suitability for the job. Although believing themselves not required to give any explanation and wishing to stick strictly to the script that they had been advised to follow, it was a natural human reaction to try to give an answer, as I am satisfied Mr King did, in a situation that was mutually unusual and stressful. [28] The only reason that Mr Kearns and/or Ms King gave to Ms Smith for her summary dismissal was that she was...

4. Lowe and Ors as Trustees of the Vivienne Hicks Family Trust v Morrison [2011] NZWHT Auckland 27 [pdf, 263 KB]

   ...of Rilee. [73] It is unquestionable that Rilee was the developer. However, it is necessary to make a finding as to whether Mr Savill remained a co-developer after the incorporation of Rilee. In other words, whether his actions as the „human face‟ of Rilee were actually the actions of a developer per se. This is important as a developer has a Page | 22 non delegable duty of care.9 A director who is not a developer may still be liable but their negligence must ar...

5. [2017] NZEmpC 68 Matsuoka v LSG Sky Chefs NZ Ltd [pdf, 272 KB]

   ...of the First Amended Statement of Claim dated 3 August 2012 that the defendant’s decision-maker was biased because of “her” involvement in the transfer progress. The reference to “her” is a reference to Marie Park, the defendant’s human resources manager and the defendant has consistently maintained the position that Ms Park was, indeed the decision–maker in relation to the decision to dismiss the plaintiff. [11] The starting point for a consideration of both...

6. [2021] NZEnvC 001 Minister of Conservation v Northland Regional Council [pdf, 3.8 MB]

   ...in Northland. [65] Overall, we conclude that the most significant risk to aquatic flora and fauna is low flow periods, particularly during the drought periods experienced on a relatively frequent basis. This is also the time of peak demand for human use of water including for household, stock and rootstock. [66] In relation to Water Harvesting the high variability in flow gives more confidence that, provided appropriate flow variability is maintained, the other objectives of the Pla...

7. Proactive release - New Compensation Guidelines for Wrongful Conviction and Imprisonment [pdf, 756 KB]

   ...compensation for wrongly convicted individuals. This process has worked in the past and I propose that it continues. Legislative Implications 72. There are no legislative implications. Impact Analysis 73. The impact analysis requirements do not apply. Human Rights 74. The proposals appear to be consistent with the rights and freedoms contained in the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 and the Human Rights Act 1993. Implications for Māori 75. I recognise that Māori experience d...

8. Director of Proceedings v Taranaki District Health Board [2021] NZHRRT 49 [pdf, 613 KB]

   ...papers DATE OF DECISION: 1 November 2021 (REDACTED) DECISION OF TRIBUNAL1 1 [This decision is to be cited as Director of Proceedings v Taranaki District Health Board [2021] NZHRRT 49. Note publication restrictions.] IN THE HUMAN RIGHTS REVIEW TRIBUNAL [2021] NZHRRT 49 I TE TARAIPIUNARA MANA TANGATA 2 [1] These proceedings under the Health and Disability Commissioner Act 1994 were filed on 31 March 2021. [2] Prior to the filing of the proceedings the parties...

9. Directory of Official Information 2019 M-O [pdf, 513 KB]

   ...Vice-Chancellor. The Senior Leadership Team comprises the Vice Chancellor (chair)l; the Pro Vice- Chancellor’s (who provide academic and administrative leadership of each of the University’s five academic colleges – Business, Creative Arts, Health, Humanities & Social Sciences, and Sciences); and Deputy Vice-Chancellor’s, whose portfolios provide core corporate functions to all operating units across the University 17 The Academic Board has established a sub-committee...

10. [2021] NZEmpC 35 Radford v Chief of New Zealand Defence Force [pdf, 415 KB]

    ...apply to an employment agreement between the Chief of Defence Force and a person in Ms Radford’s situation. [6] In evaluating whether the matter should be removed to the Court, the Authority received evidence from the Divisional Manager for Human Resources for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade (MFAT), as well as from the parties. 1 Chief of New Zealand Defence Force v Radford [2018] NZERA Wellington 106 (Member Campbell) at [20]. [7] Subsequently, MFAT appli...