Search Results

1. [2016] NZEmpC 42 ITE v ALA [pdf, 233 KB]

   ...shared services project; criticisms the plaintiff had of management within the defendant organisation; concerns relating to perceived flaws in the defendant’s security systems; perceived IT risks for both the defendant and other organisations; resourcing concerns and concerns relating to the competency of other employees of the defendant; concerns about the defendant’s financial expenditure; a perceived personal vendetta against the plaintiff by senior management, characterised...

2. [2010] NZEmpC 72 Horton v Fonterra Cooperative Group Ltd [pdf, 81 KB]

   ...through to Peter Jepsen, PAE’s maintenance planner. [6] In a later investigation meeting, held on Wednesday 20 May 2009, there is a record of what Mr Jepsen told Brian Purser, Fonterra’s Maintenance Manager, and Emma Bennett, Fonterra’s Human Resources Adviser on the site, concerning the removal of the iron. Comparing the record of that interview with Mr Jepsen and Mr Horton’s account to Fonterra, it is common ground that Mr Horton told Mr Jepsen he wanted to take some r...

3. [2017] NZEmpC 40 XYZ v ABC [pdf, 271 KB]

   ...defendant’s protected disclosure policy reflects the provisions of the Protected Disclosures Act. [11] Serious wrongdoing is defined in the Protected Disclosures Act as including the unlawful, corrupt or irregular use of public funds or public resources. The Act contains a number of protections for staff who make a protected disclosure, including that the person receiving the disclosure must use their best endeavours to keep confidential the identity of the disclosing party unle...

4. Henton v REAA, Max House & Barfoot & Thompson Ltd [2013] NZREADT 18 [pdf, 115 KB]

   ...its way through the system with the Real Estate Agents Authority; (b) His separate complaint about the complaint-handling process, which was dismissed by the Committee; and (c) The present appeal against that dismissal taking up time and resources of the Tribunal. The second respondents understand the Authority's wish to try to widen the scope as much as possible for potential unsatisfactory conduct findings, but it is submitted that the present attempts are taking this...

5. LCRO 45 and 46/2014 PO v RQ and FE [pdf, 273 KB]

   ...who was an accountant, and who had looked at the books of the business. He said that the real estate agent who brokered the agreement had said that “everything was legal”. [45] Mr PO also went to the Council in [City] to enquire about any resource consent issues. 11 [46] It is clear that Mr PO holds Mrs FE and to a lesser extent Mr RQ responsible for the failure of the business. He calculated his losses as being in the region of $150,000. Mrs FE’s submissions at hear...

6. LCRO 98/2018 and 201/2018 HK v CN (22 May 2019) [pdf, 238 KB]

   ...Neither the developer nor Mr CN cancelled the purchase agreement within the following 10 working days. The condition was therefore deemed waived on 22 February 2016. [6] The statutory condition imported into the purchase agreement by s 225 of the Resource Management Act 1991 (s 225 condition) was stated to be “modified so that [Mr CN’s] rights” under s 225(2)(b) did “not arise until [8 February 2016]”.3 [7] A month later, on 9 March 2016, Mr CN entered into an agreement...

7. NZCVS Cycle 1 (2018) data tables [pdf, 2 MB]

   ...experience of intimate partner and sexual violence p. 35 Lifetime experience of intimate partner violence and sexual violence - number of adults victimised once or more 4.13 https://www.justice.govt.nz/justice-sector-policy/research-data/nzcvs/resources-and-results/ 9 Lifetime experience of intimate partner violence (IPV) by demographic factors p. 36 Lifetime experience of intimate partner violence - number of adults victimised once or more, percentage of adults vi...

8. Paraire v Paraire – Part Mangatawa 10 (2015) 105 Waikato Maniapoto MB 67 (105 WMN 67) [pdf, 213 KB]

   ...that could reasonably [be] held by both the Trustee owners of the property and Mr Paraire was that he held a long term right to reside in the shed. Otherwise it would have been totally unreasonable to expect Mr Paraire, a man of limited financial resources, to expend such a large amount of money on improving the shed. The law [63] In the case of Gillies v Keogh, the Court of Appeal referred to what are known as the five probanda required to be shown by a party seeking to rely upon...

9. Proactive release - 2020 Cannabis Referendum [pdf, 4.2 MB]

   ...particularly for Māori, Pasifika, ethnic communities, migrants and refugees. 106. As cannabis use increases the risk of mental health and addiction problems, the regulatory model for recreational cannabis needs to sit alongside greater investment in resources for prevention, early intervention, and wrap-around health and treatment services for substance use disorders. Services need to be more widely available and adequately address people’s needs, including culturally appropriate serv...

10. Nicholson v Pene - Tauakira No. 2M No.4 (2023) 477 Aotea MB 140 (477 AOT 140) [pdf, 442 KB]

    ...neighbouring sections and no extension of G towards H3 whare; 11 3. will confirm ownership of the house referred to as H3 whare in the name of the Petaera and Potaka-Osborne whānau as advised; 4. will support and assist whānau applications for resourcing and funding of building projects where possible; and 5. agrees to discontinue application A20200006272 filed in the Māori Land Court. [67] The Compensation Agreement states: COMPENSATION By agreement and in the s...