Search Results

1. [2017] NZEmpC 161 Aslam v Transportation Auckland Corp Ltd [pdf, 284 KB]

   ...discloses serious misconduct or potential dishonesty. Here, both of those possibilities were apparent from the outset. Having said that, it seems the company did meet the timeframes provided for in cl 47.4, taking into account (as the clause permits) weekend days and days that Mr Aslam was not working. Process was fair [54] During the process Mr Aslam was advised of Transportation Auckland’s concerns, and understood the issues involved. He had several opportunities to res...

2. [2015] NZEmpC 142 First Union Inc v Jacks Hardware & Timber Ltd preliminary [pdf, 183 KB]

   ...should not so interpret the relevant word or phrase.” 5 [24] The defendant submits that to apply new s 33 to the relevant events which occurred before 6 March 2015, would lead to an absurd result. This, the defendant says, would include permitting parties who have concluded bargaining to have this re-evaluated in terms of a legislative provision which was not in force or even potentially foreseen when the bargaining was concluded. So, too, the defendant contends, such an in...

3. Kotahitanga Log Haulage Limited v Forest Distribution Limited - Mangaroa (2015) 121 Waiariki MB 149 (121 WAR 149) [pdf, 162 KB]

   ...such as that dealing with stock related claims. [30] Judge Harvey accepted the submissions of the trust and said: I am not persuaded that the framers of the act intended section 18(1)(d) to be applied in the manner suggested by the applicant. To permit the applicant’s claims to advance at this juncture would be to place a meaning on the phrase relates to that travels beyond a plain and ordinary reading of those words. The fact that neither counsel could find any relevant suppor...

4. [2017] NZEmpC 66 Lal v The Warehouse [pdf, 136 KB]

   ...particular circumstances. The particular circumstances in this case include the protracted interactions which had occurred up to the date on which the decision to terminate was made. I am satisfied that The Warehouse’s response fell within the permitted range. Conclusion [50] I conclude that The Warehouse’s decision to dismiss Ms Lal on medical grounds was justified. That means that no relief flows from it. Even if I had found the decision to be unjustified, I would n...

5. Hakaraia - Part Raetihi 2B2C3C2A1 (2007) 183 Aotea MB 2 (183 AOT 2) [pdf, 3 MB]

   ...enterprise that he wanted to undertake but which is effectively put on hold, Sir. The bona fides of this, Sir, is supported by the application he made to the local authority, the Ruapehu District Council, and I have a copy to hand up Sir about the permit that he applied for and was granted but which has now expired and he'll have to restart it. I can put that in through him if Your Honour wants me to do so. [Documents handed to bench.] Sir the affidavits are sworn as I understand it...

6. 2021-02-05 Central Otago Winegrowers Association Evidence of James Dicey [pdf, 106 KB]

   ...casual jobs have also been created due to this investment. 50. Short terms associated with water consents will compromise the values of vineyards and make development of additional productive area prohibitive. The costs of securing the short term permits are rapidly escalating and will redirect money to funding these applications rather than developing more productive land. 51. Water is applied in a very effective and efficient manner in accordance with industry best practice. Add...

7. Williams v Trustees of the Hokio Part A Ahu Whenua Trust - Part Hokio A Section 1-4 Block IV (2014) 321 Aotea MB 24 (321 AOT 24) [pdf, 208 KB]

   ...and at or about that time, had re-vested in it land and houses formerly owned by the Crown. This included 11 houses at Hokio beach. [4] The current trust order dates from May 2004 and by clause 3(b)(11) includes the right of the trustees to permit occupation. There are also powers to lease. [5] I heard today from one of the trustees, Vivienne Taueki, who gave evidence that when the properties were handed back from the Crown they were in a poor state and had been run down. The i...

8. Watson v Capital and Coast District Health Board [2015] NZHRRT 27 [pdf, 199 KB]

   ...information, the individual shall be advised that, under principle 7, the individual may request the correction of that information. (3) The application of this principle is subject to the provisions of Parts 4 and 5. [67] Refusal of access is permitted only in the circumstances identified in ss 27 to 29. See s 30: http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1993/0028/latest/link.aspx?id=DLM297080� http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1993/0028/latest/link.aspx?id=DLM297092�...

9. [2015] NZEmpC 228 NZ Meat Workers Union Inc v South Pacific Meats Ltd and Talley [pdf, 177 KB]

   ...attributes of a barrister. It is his duty to not keep back from the court any information which ought to be before it, and he must in no way mislead the court by stating facts that are untrue, or mislead the judge as to the true facts, or knowingly permit a client to attempt to deceive the court. How far a barrister may go on behalf of his client is a question too difficult to be capable of abstract definition, but when concrete cases arise one can see for oneself whether what he ha...

10. RB v SCX LCRO 92/2014 (11 August 2014) [pdf, 75 KB]

    ...purpose and intent, and must properly address the grievance which caused offence to be taken. [57] Mr RB’s apology is framed as follows:16 Pursuant to the order of the Standards Committee and without being able to understand why a lawyer is not permitted to ask a Police Officer to be truthful in Court and also not being able to understand how asking a Police Officer to be truthful is equivalent to the making a positive statement the Police Officer is lying when the two are different,...