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.

Search results

3609 items matching your search terms

  6. [2013] NZEmpC 13 NZ Post Primary Teachers Assn & Gray v Cambridge High School & Secretary for Education [PDF, 174 KB]

    [2013] NZEmpC 13 NZ Post Primary Teachers Assn & Gray v Cambridge High School & Secretary for Education (Interlocutory Judgment od Judge AD Ford) Challenge to objection to disclosure. Unsuccessful application by defendants for disclosure of a list of the first plaintiff's members. List not relevant to any disputed matter in the present proceeding. Successful application by defendants for disclosure of internal emails between the first plaintiff's officials or employees regarding an email from Ms Sarah Borrell of 15 July 2011, the subject line of which was "Without prejudice proposal around qualifications". Emails relevant and not protected from disclosure by "without prejudice" privilege.
  9. [2013] NZEmpC 9 Gini v Strugess [PDF, 73 KB]

    [2013] NZEmpC 9 Gini v Strugess (4 February 2013 Judgment of Judge AD FordSuccessful challenge to Authority costs determination. The Court concluded that the Authority imposed the $1,500 uplift on the normal daily tariff of $3,000 as a punishment on the plaintiff because she knew or ought to have known of the time limits within which to claim a penalty. The Court held the plaintiff's ignorance of the law is not the type of "conduct" contemplated in Da Cruz to be taken in account in determining whether to inflate or reduce a costs award. The Court fixed the Authority's costs in the sum of $3,000. Plaintiff awarded $750 costs.
  11. [2013] NZEmpC 7 Air New Zealand Ltd v Wulff [PDF, 117 KB]

    [2013] NZEmpC 7 ARC 101/09 Air New Zealand Ltd v Wulff. Defendant was ordered reinstated by Authority and then again by Court on challenge. The parties could not agree the appropriate sick leave balance for the defendant. Court calculated sick leave from date of reinstatement by Authority including previous service but not period between dismissal and reinstatement. No deduction for notional taking of sick leave before defendant returned to work allowed.
  14. [2013] NZEmpC 4 Dalley v Norrell Building Ltd [PDF, 106 KB]

    [2013] NZEmpC 4 Dalley v Norrell Building Ltd. Successful challenge to Authority determination. The Court held that the plaintiff was unjustifiably dismissed, but assessed his contribution to the dismissal at one third. Plaintiff awarded $2,670 as reimbursement for lost wages, with 5% interest and $4,000 compensation pursuant to s 123(1)(c)(i). The Court declined to award a penalty for failing to provide the plaintiff with a written employment agreement as required by s 63A(2) of the Act. Costs reserved.