[2022] NZEmpC 113 Arohanui Hospice Service Trust v New Zealand Nurses Organisation (Consent Interlocutory Judgment of Judge J Kathryn Beck, 27 June 2022) APPLICATION FOR STAY - consent.
You can search by selecting a jurisdiction, a keyword (for example a name) or browse by year.
Some jurisdictions only publish a selection of decisions. Identifying details may be removed.
3897 items matching your search terms
-
[2022] NZEmpC 113 Arohanui Hospice Service Trust v New Zealand Nurses Organisation [PDF, 148 KB] -
[2022] NZEmpC 111 Humphreys v Humphreys [PDF, 217 KB] [2022] NZEmpC 111 Humphreys v Humphreys (Interlocutory Judgment (No 3) of Chief Judge Christina Inglis, 23 June 2022) APPLICATION TO ACCESS COURT DOCUMENTS - formal court record is accessible to the public - access to other documents will not assist for applicant's purposes - substantive hearing is not in progress - application declined.
-
[2022] NZEmpC 110 Fleming v Attorney-General [PDF, 216 KB] [2022] NZEmpC 110 Fleming v Attorney-General (Interlocutory Judgment (No 5) of Chief Judge Christina Inglis, 23 June 2022) APPLICATION TO ACCESS COURT DOCUMENTS - formal court record is accessible to the public - access to other documents will not assist for applicant's purposes - substantive hearing is not in progress - application declined.
-
[2022] NZEmpC 109 Wilson-Grange Investments T/A The Grange Bar and Restaurant [PDF, 188 KB] [2022] NZEmpC 109 Wilson-Grange Investments T/A The Grange Bar and Restaurant (Interlocutory Judgment of Chief Judge Christina Inglis, 23 June 2022) APPLICATION FOR STAY - no evidence of challenge being rendered ineffectual - balance of convenience does not favour granting stay - application declined.
-
[2022] NZEmpC 108 Saipe v Bethell [PDF, 170 KB] [2022] NZEmpC 108 Saipe v Bethell (Costs Judgment of Judge J C Holden, 21 June 2022) COSTS - GUIDELINE SCALE - calculation overstated costs - financial circumstances considered.
-
[2022] NZEmpC 106 Soapi v Pick Hawke’s Bay Inc [PDF, 209 KB] [2022] NZEmpC 106 Soapi v Pick Hawke’s Bay Inc (Judgment of Judge K G Smith, 21 June 2022) APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL LEAVE TO REMOVE MATTER TO THE COURT - several questions of law - questions are important both to the parties and to the wider workforce - no reason to decline removal - application granted.
-
[2022] NZEmpC 107 JKL v Stirling Andersen Ltd [PDF, 272 KB] [2022] NZEmpC 107 JKL v Stirling Andersen Ltd (Judgment of Judge Kathryn Beck, 20 June 2022) CHALLENGE - Authority was correct not to recall determination - non-publication order could have been made without recall - Authority made a determination about non-publication that can be challenged - applicant is vulnerable - non-publication appropriate - name suppression and non-publication ordered.
-
[2022] NZEmpC 105 Mende Biotech Ltd v Mende [PDF, 144 KB] [2022] NZEmpC 105 Mende Biotech Ltd v Mende (Consent Interlocutory Judgment of Judge K G Smith, 20 June 2022) APPLICATION FOR STAY - consent.
-
[2022] NZEmpC 104 SP Blinds Ltd v Hogan [PDF, 190 KB] [2022] NZEmpC 104 SP Blinds Ltd v Hogan (Interlocutory Judgment of Chief Judge Christina Inglis, 17 June 2022) APPLICATION FOR STAY OF EXECUTION - no evidence of impecuniosity - no good reason to grant stay - application declined.
-
[2022] NZEmpC 103 Pilgrim v Attorney-General [PDF, 230 KB] [2022] NZEmpC 103 Pilgrim v Attorney-General (Interlocutory Judgment (No 3) of Chief Judge Christina Inglis, 16 June 2022) APPLICATION TO ACCESS COURT DOCUMENTS – application comes before the hearing – privacy and confidentiality interests considered – application declined.
-
[2022] NZEmpC 102 Reimann v Hodgson [PDF, 145 KB] [2022] NZEmpC 102 Reimann v Hodgson (Consent Judgment of Judge J C Holden, 14 June 2022) CONSENT.
-
[2022] NZEmpC 101 UXK v Talent Propeller Ltd [PDF, 357 KB] [2022] NZEmpC 101 UXK v Talent Propeller Ltd (Judgment of Judge B A Corkill, 13 June 2022) CHALLENGE – Employment Relations Act 2000, s 179(5) – witness summons – summons required production of medical information – public interest in preventing harm to doctor/patient relationship – witness summons set aside – NON-PUBLICATION – permanent non-publication order of health information before the Court granted – in present circumstances permanent non-publication order of name and identifying not appropriate – interim non-publication of name and identifying details granted.
-
[2022] NZEmpC 100 Kowhai Intermediate School Board of Trustees v West [PDF, 174 KB] [2022] NZEmpC 100 Kowhai Intermediate School Board of Trustees v West (Costs Judgment of Judge K G Smith, 9 June 2022) COSTS - DISCONTINUANCE - challenge was not meritless - discontinuance was a part of compromise - both parties were successful - costs to lie where they fall.
-
[2022] NZEmpC 99 Kingipotiki v Taplin [PDF, 146 KB] [2022] NZEmpC 99 Kingipotiki v Taplin (Interlocutory Judgment of Judge K G Smith, 7 June 2022) APPLICATION FOR CONTINUATION OF FREEZING ORDER - consent.
-
[2022] NZEmpC 98 Courage v Attorney-General [PDF, 210 KB] [2022] NZEmpC 98 Courage v Attorney-General (Interlocutory Judgment of Chief Judge Christina Inglis, 3 June 2022) APPLICATION TO SHARE DOCUMENTS WITH GOVERNMENT AGENCIES - serious allegations to be investigated by government agencies - court documents will assist in investigations - application granted.
-
[2022] NZEmpC 97 Bowen v Bank of New Zealand [PDF, 201 KB] [2022] NZEmpC 97 Bowen v Bank of New Zealand (Interlocutory Judgment of Judge J C Holden, 2 June 2022) APPLICATION FOR SECURITY FOR COSTS – reason to believe respondent would not be able to pay costs if unsuccessful – interests of justice favour ordering security for costs – application granted – APPLICATION FOR STAY – not appropriate to order stay pending payment of a previous costs award – application declined.
-
[2022] NZEmpC 96 BD v FG [PDF, 158 KB] [2022] NZEmpC 96 BD v FG (Interlocutory Judgment (No 2) of Chief Judge Christina Inglis, 2 June 2022) REVIEW OF FREEZING, ANCILLARY AND NON-PUBLICATION ORDERS – freezing order will lapse – ancillary orders to continue – permanent non-publication granted.
-
[2022] NZEmpC 95 Kingipotiki v Taplin [PDF, 220 KB] [2022] NZEmpC 95 Kingipotiki v Taplin (Judgment of Judge K G Smith, 30 May 2022) APPLICATION FOR FREEZING ORDER – URGENCY – application granted.
-
[2022] NZEmpC 94 BD v FG [PDF, 175 KB] [2022] NZEmpC 94 BD v FG (Judgment of Judge Chief Judge Christina Inglis, 26 May 2022) APPLICATION FOR FREEZING AND ANCILLARY ORDERS – APPLICATION FOR NON-PUBLICATION ORDER - applications granted.
-
[2022] NZEmpC 92 New Zealand Airline Pilots’ Association IUOW Inc v Airways Corporation of New Zealand Ltd [PDF, 184 KB] [2022] NZEmpC 92 New Zealand Airline Pilots’ Association IUOW Inc v Airways Corporation of New Zealand Ltd (Interlocutory Judgment of Judge K G Smith, 26 May 2022) APPLICATION FOR STAY – balance of convenience and interests of justice favour granting stay – application granted.
-
[2022] NZEmpC 93 Solander Maritime Ltd v Munro [PDF, 157 KB] [2022] NZEmpC 93 Solander Maritime Ltd v Munro (Interlocutory Judgment (No 2) of Chief Judge Christina Inglis, 25 May 2022) APPLICATION FOR CONTINUATION OF FREEZING ORDER - consent.
-
[2022] NZEmpC 91 UBP Ltd v Rangitaawa-Kaui [PDF, 139 KB] [2022] NZEmpC 91 UBP Ltd v Rangitaawa-Kaui (Consent Judgment of Judge Kathryn Beck, 25 May 2022) CONSENT – parties reached settlement.
-
[2022] NZEmpC 90 Yakka Contracting Ltd v Naicker [PDF, 138 KB] [2022] NZEmpC 90 Yakka Contracting Ltd v Naicker (Consent Judgment (No 3) of Judge Kathryn Beck, 24 May 2022) CONSENT – parties reached settlement.
-
[2022] NZEmpC 89 Bay of Plenty District Health Board v CultureSafe New Zealand Ltd [PDF, 299 KB] [2022] NZEmpC 89 Bay of Plenty District Health Board v CultureSafe New Zealand Ltd (Interlocutory Judgment (No 4) of Judge B A Corkill, 24 May 2022) APPLICATION FOR STRIKE-OUT – no grounds for strike-out – application declined – APPLICATION FOR STAY – Court of Appeal proceedings are ongoing – interests of justice require stay to be granted.
-
[2022] NZEmpC 88 ABC v DEF [PDF, 234 KB] [2022] NZEmpC 88 ABC v DEF (Costs Judgment of Judge B A Corkill, 24 May 2022) COSTS – TEST CASE – FINANCIAL CAPACITY – costs granted – not a test case because not sufficiently novel issue – costs decreased because of plaintiff’s financial capacity.