Search Results

1. [2024] NZEmpC 93 Television New Zealand Ltd v E Tū Incorporated [pdf, 327 KB]

   ...Fonterra, the statutory and common law context in which employment agreements are entered into and operate is relevant to the interpretative exercise.5 Employment agreements are not akin to arms-length business agreements; they involve people and human interactions (not the economic exchange of money for goods); they occur within the framework of multifaceted obligations, both statutory (such as mutual obligations of good faith) and common law (such as the obligation of fidelity an...

2. [2025] NZEmpC 98 The Chief Executive of Oranga Tamariki - Ministry for Children v Hill [pdf, 246 KB]

   ...Regulations. Its concerns were labelled as serious.22 [27] Ms Hill was offered and took up the opportunity to watch the CCTV footage of the incident.23 [28] On 25 March 2021 a disciplinary meeting was held. Mr Kepu and Tracy Spence, senior human relations advisor, attended the meeting on behalf of Oranga Tamariki. Ms Hill attended with her PSA representative. There is a voice recording of this discussion. The meeting was adjourned and reconvened on 30 March 2021.24 [29] The...

3. Herbst v Accident Compensation Corporation (Claim for personal injury) [2024] NZACC 192 (27 November 2024) [pdf, 255 KB]

   ...section 20(2)(e) to (h)). Section 25(1)(a)(i) provides that “accident” means a specific event or a series of events, other than a gradual process, that involves the application of a force (including gravity), or resistance, external to the human body. Section 25(3) notes that the fact that a person has suffered a personal injury is not of itself to be construed as an indication or presumption that it was caused by an accident. [73] In Johnston,1 France J stated: [11] It is c...

4. National Standards Committee v Young [2017] NZLCDT 41 [pdf, 315 KB]

   ...necessary to carefully consider the dicta in the two recent decisions of the High Court and Court of Appeal respectively in Deliu6 and Orlov.7 [45] In Orlov, the Court was considering the conduct of the practitioner in making a complaint to the Human Rights Review Tribunal, which was acknowledged to be a personal claim. At para [110] the Court had this to say: “But again, given that the person alleged to have discriminated is a Judge, the person complaining is a practitioner, a...

5. LCRO 81/2025 CB v AC (26 September 2025) [pdf, 239 KB]

   ...necessarily that the instruction to sell the property was a joint instruction, the file was therefore a joint file and both parties were entitled to request any information comprising part of the client file record. It might well be the lawyer’s human concern not to trigger any avoidable, further fractiousness but it is not the lawyer’s responsibility to do so if client file information is requested. 13 [65] I apologise for my incorrect comment that the respondent did not request...

6. E30 First Planning JWS [pdf, 2.7 MB]

   1407 1408 1409 Notes: 1. Changes that were shown in underline and strikethrough in the 18 July 2018 mediation version and that were not highlighted, highlighted green or otherwise agreed have been “accepted” in this version. 2. Changes made subsequent to mediation on 19-20 July shown in tracked change in this version. 3. Comments boxes are included to address matters still subject to discussion or not otherwise resolved. America’s Cup Wynyard Hobson Applicant’s Amen

7. E27 Contamination, Groundwater, Earthworks and Air Discharges JWS [pdf, 3 MB]

   1316 1317 1318 Attachment A Proposed conditions as at 27th July 2018 used during expert conferencing. 1319 Notes: 1. Changes that were shown in underline and strikethrough in the 18 July 2018 mediation version and that were not highlighted, highlighted green or otherwise agreed have been “accepted” in this version. 2. Changes made subsequent to mediation on 19-20 July shown in tracked change in this version. 3. Comments boxes are included to address matters still sub

8. Joanne Barbara Noble - Evidence in Chief [pdf, 3.2 MB]

   BEFORE THE ENVIRONMENT COURT AT AUCKLAND IN THE MATTER: of the Resource Management Act 1991 AND IN THE MATTER: of appeals pursuant to clause 14 of the First Schedule to the Act BETWEEN MOTITI ROHE MOANA TRUST (ENV-2015-AKL-000134) AND AND NGATI MAKINO HERITAGE TRUST (ENV-2015-AKL-000140) NGATI RANGINUI IWI INCORPORATED SOCIETY (ENV-2015-AKL-000141) Appellants BAY OF PLENTY REGIONAL COUNCIL Respondent VARIOUS. Section 27 4 Parties STATEMENT OF EVIDENCE OF JO

9. Muaupoko-O2NL-CIA-final-v2.pdf [pdf, 14 MB]

   MUAŪPOKO CULTURAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT MUAŪPOKO TRIBAL AUTHORITY LAKE HOROWHENUA TRUST 1 Assessment of effects on Muaūpoko values ŌTAKI TO NORTH OF LEVIN HIGHWAY PROJECT FOR WAKA KOTAHI NZ TRANSPORT AGENCY OCTOBER 2022 www.muaupoko.iwi.nz www.horowhenualaketrust.org Taitoko | Levin Taitoko | Levin MUAŪPOKO CULTURAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT MUAŪPOKO TRIBAL AUTHORITY LAKE HOROWHENUA TRUST 2 Cover artwork: Lake Horowhenua. 1875. A view of

10. 2024-NZEnvC-047-Waste-Management-NZ-Limited-v-Hauraki-District-Council.pdf [pdf, 1.6 MB]

    IN THE ENVIRONMENT COURT AT AUCKLAND I TE KŌTI TAIAO O AOTEAROA KI TĀMAKI MAKAURAU Decision [2024] NZEnvC 047 IN THE MATTER the Resource Management Act 1991 AND of an appeal under section 120 of the Act BETWEEN WASTE MANAGEMENT NZ LIMITED (ENV-2021-AKL-000137) Appellant AND HAURAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL WAIKATO REGIONAL COUNCIL Respondents AND MARK OFSOSKE TE KUPENGA O NGĀTI HAKO Section 274 Parties Court: Environment Judge D A