Search Results

1. [2012] NZEmpC 128 Mana Coach Services Ltd v New Zealand Tramways & Public Passenger Transport Employees Union Inc [pdf, 88 KB]

   ...counsel, allocated a hearing of these before the Court on Thursday 30 August 2012. [26] It was not until 30 May 2012 that the application for rehearing was filed by the plaintiff. This was accompanied by a brief affidavit by the plaintiff’s human resources manager. This set out his understanding of the issues remitted to the Court and identified another issue that the deponent said had not been decided in the Court’s judgment 3 of 26 September 2008. The manager, Marau Russel...

2. [2015] NZEmpC 168 Lawson v NZ Transport Agency interlocutory [pdf, 103 KB]

   ...the defendant. [16] Mr Lawson’s primary submission is focussed on access to justice issues. While not cited by either party, I note that in Highgate on Broadway Ltd v Devine Kós J observed that: 13 … Access to justice is an essential human right. The cost of exercising that right is the payment of costs in the event of failure. The right of a successful defendant to costs in that event is arguably subordinate to the plaintiff's right to be heard. Strong social polic...

3. [2014] NZEmpC 77 Rodkiss v Carter Holt Harvey Limited [pdf, 106 KB]

   ...for the plaintiff submitted that Rose v Order of St John was of assistance in distilling the relevant principles from previous interpretations of s 148 by the Court. 8 Counsel also referred to Director of Proceedings v O’Malley, where the Human Rights Review Tribunal held that confidentiality attaches to the mediation not an event giving rise to it. 9 It was submitted that on the facts of the present case, the defendant was aware mediation had ended and that the plaintiff...

4. MacMillan v NZ Parole Board [2013] NZHRRT 3 [pdf, 61 KB]

   1 IN THE HUMAN RIGHTS REVIEW TRIBUNAL [2013] NZHRRT 3 Reference No. HRRT 004/2012 UNDER THE PRIVACY ACT 1993 BETWEEN ANDREW RONALD MACMILLAN PLAINTIFF AND NEW ZEALAND PAROLE BOARD DEFENDANT AT AUCKLAND BEFORE: Mr RPG Haines QC, Chairperson Dr SJ Hickey, Member Mr RK Musuku, Member REPRESENTATION: Mr AR MacMillan in person Ms VJ Owen for Defendant DATE OF DECISION: 31 January 2013 DECISION OF TRIBUNAL STRIKING OUT ST...

5. AD v ZX LCRO 87 / 2010 (14 December 2010) [pdf, 82 KB]

   ...the employees on the basis of joint employment. However, I would observe, that any lawyer acting for the Applicant’s clients, would have been provided with this information by the clients themselves, who included the former General Manager and Human Resources Manager. Consequently, the confidentiality of the information obtained by the Applicant in advising on the Q and A sheet may be more illusory than real. [46] The Respondent refers to the comments of Asher J in Hana New Zeala...

6. [2016] NZSSAA 110 (22 December 2016) [pdf, 112 KB]

   ...disadvantaged by the application of s 70. [19] In this case it appears that the appellant is subject to differential treatment because she is married and she is married to a non-New Zealand resident. This amounts to discrimination under s 23 of the Human Rights Act 1993 and as such appears to be a breach of s 19 of the Bill of Rights Act 1990. [20] Section 6 of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act provides that whenever any enactment can be given a meaning that is consistent with th...

7. BORA Health (Drinking Water) Amendment Bill [pdf, 405 KB]

   ...conclusion, we have given particular emphasis to the purpose of this legislation, and the need to create a workable drinking-water regime. Jeff Orr Chief Legal Counsel Office of Legal Counsel Stuart Beresford Principal Adviser Bill of Rights/Human Rights Team Footnotes 1 The Bill defines "designated officer" to include a person designated as a Medical Officer of Health, a Health Protection Officer, or as "an officer who has functions, duties, or powers under t...

8. BG v TC LCRO 199/2013 (22 January 2015) [pdf, 46 KB]

   ...concerns. [33] Mr BG wants a retrial, to have his firearms licence back, and to be paid compensation by Mr TC for putting him in this position. He says he has taken other steps to try and recover his position, including laying a complaint to the Human Rights Commission alleging unlawful discrimination. [34] Other than his request for compensation, none of Mr BG’s concerns about the Police, the Crown or the Judge, or his requests for remedies, fall within the jurisdiction of thi...

9. [2017] NZEmpC 26 Tulloch v Hays Specialist Recruitment Australia Pty Ltd [pdf, 96 KB]

   ...1 Tulloch v Hays Specialist Recruitment (Australia) Pty Ltd [2016] NZERA Wellington 120. Background [3] Mr Tulloch is a Registered Electrician. Hays is a company that provides recruitment for the provision of human resources services. On 8 January 2015, Mr Tulloch responded to an advertisement placed by Hays for an electrician to work for a third party on a particular project. After being interviewed by a Hays consultant, Mr Tulloch signed an ind

10. BORA Maritime Powers Extension Bill [pdf, 295 KB]

    ...Rights Act. Section 22 – liberty of the person 28. Section 22 of the Bill of Rights Act affirms that everyone has the right not to be arbitrarily arrested or detained. The purpose of the right not to be arbitrarily detained is the protection of human dignity, autonomy and liberty.17 29. To trigger the concept of detention there must be a “substantial intrusion on personal liberty”,18 whether a physical deprivation or a statutory constraint. The Court of Appeal has held that:19...