Search Results

1. [2015] NZEmpC 158 Sealord Group Ltd v Pickering [pdf, 123 KB]

   ...I would even hear back at such a late stage. I felt that with the hearing so close it was hard to think that Sealord was treating it seriously. 10. I am a regular hunter and fisher in the Sounds. While I tend to carry my cell phone with me, service in the region is unreliable, with many dead spots which you can't be certain of when you are in the bush. However, it is no different to me being at sea, where the same situation applies. When I did not hear anything from Audrey...

2. [2021] NZACC 118 - Baker v ACC (3 August 2021) [pdf, 313 KB]

   ...given that the appellant had a fall a week after his operation and significantly jarred his neck. [15] MRI and CT scans became available on 16 March. The findings were unremarkable. [16] The Corporation completed a referral for vocational services on 21 March 2016 to identify a suitable work plan to assist the appellant back to his pre-injury position. [17] The appellant continued to experience pain issues and an epidural injection was undertaken on 30 March 2016. This yield...

3. [2023] NZEnvC 279 Trustees of Spruce Grove Trust v Queenstown Lakes District Council [pdf, 419 KB]

   ...additional dwellings when viewed from the Arrowtown Lake Hayes Road. [36] We appreciate that the maintenance of visual amenity values does not equate to avoiding visual change. As there is no natural intervening topographical feature to hide new dwellings, nor is it realistic to adopt equivalent wording to Pol 24.2.1.1B.e.i (i.e. “… ensure no development is visible from …”). Realistically, users of Arrowtown-Lake Hayes Road would not interpret the addition of some dwelli...

4. Feaver v Accident Compensation Corporation (Leave to appeal to High Court) [2024] NZACC 51 [pdf, 230 KB]

   ...conclude that there is insufficient evidence that Ms Feaver’s meat packing contained a particular property or characteristic that caused her subacromial bursitis. [21] In October 2021, an opinion was sought from Independent Doctor Assessment Services, a medico-legal opinion service managed by Professor Gorman of Auckland. The panel convened by Professor Gorman included himself as Occupational Physician and Mr Stewart Walsh, an Orthopaedic Surgeon. The panel’s opinion dated 22...

5. CAC20006 v Stevenson [2013] NZREADT 56 [pdf, 76 KB]

   ...Purchase was signed and that both documents were signed at that time (it was 25th of July). Mrs Beer agreed that Mr Beer had signed it on that date but said that she had left it with Mr Stevenson well before that time. [6] As well as the (new) Listing Authority two other documents were apparently also signed by the couple. The first was the agent’s copy of the commission. This contains the words above the parties’ signatures ‘com to be negotiated with Jon – my com $6,000...

6. CAC306 v Zhou & Anor [2015] NZREADT 51 [pdf, 223 KB]

   ...rental appraisal letters for 10 properties knowing that they were false. These properties were: a. 87 Salamanca Road, Sunnynook, Auckland b. 134 East Coast Road, Milford, Auckland; c. 3 Julia Place, Totara Vale, Auckland; d. 2 Springsdale Place, New Lynn, Auckland; e. 3 Valley View Road, Glenfield, Auckland; f. 92 Eskdale Road; Birkdale, Auckland; g. 5 Eagleson Street, Torbay, Auckland; h. 34 Diana Drive, Glenfield, Auckland; i. 36 Diana Drive, Glenfield, Auckland; and j...

7. CAC10056 v Ferguson [2013] NZREADT 5 [pdf, 83 KB]

   ...August 2011. Most of his listings were joint listings with the Defendant. (b) Jason and Catherine McGrory: the McGrorys listed their house at 20A Elliott Street with Ray White on 29 March 2010 until 29 June 2010 (for three months). They did not renew the agreement once it expired and instead listed with McDonald’s Real Estate. They did not receive a written 3 appraisal for 20A Elliott Street and Ray White did not mention to them any concerns about drug use at the property...

8. [2017] EmpC 153 Lorigan v Infinity Automotive Ltd [pdf, 479 KB]

   PETER D'ARCY LORIGAN v INFINITY AUTOMOTIVE LIMITED NZEmpC AUCKLAND [2017] NZEmpC 153 [6 December 2017] IN THE EMPLOYMENT COURT AUCKLAND [2017] NZEmpC 153 EMPC 377/2015 EMPC 277/2016 EMPC 215/2017 IN THE MATTER OF challenges to determinations of the Employment Relations Authority AND IN THE MATTER of proceedings removed AND IN THE MATTER of interlocutory applications BETWEEN PETER D'ARCY LORIGAN Plaintiff AND I

9. [2023] NZREADT 28 - Whalan and Partners Ltd v CAC2107 & SL (06 October 2023) [pdf, 232 KB]

   ...the inconsistency between the estimate and the schedule of fees at the time the listing was executed. They should not be able to seek a remedy based on that mistake. 3. There was a regrettable miscommunication surrounding the estimate. The service fee was clear, as was the vendors’ ability to calculate it. They were aware the estimate and the schedule of fees were at odds at the time of listing, but elected to wait until the agency had completed its service before seeking to...

10. [2016] NZEmpC 36 Western Bay of Plenty DHB v McInnes [pdf, 155 KB]

    ...the French tourists were still there. No written statement was taken although they were asked questions. The Frenchman’s responses were translated by another member of the group. [20] The Council notified a serious-harm incident to Worksafe New Zealand. Worksafe New Zealand later confirmed that it did not intend to investigate. While the Police had attended the incident, and had taken statements, no charges were laid. The documentation reflects that neither Mr McInnes nor t...