Employment Court of New Zealand Te Kōti Take Mahi o Aotearoa

[2017] NZEmpC 10 Xtreme Dining t/a Think Steel v Dewar (Costs Judgment of the Full Court, 14 February 2017) COSTS – test case – Calderbank offer – GST considered – actual costs appropriate – plaintiff to pay costs of $25.031.16

[2017] NZEmpC 8 Lawson v New Zealand Transport Agency (Costs Judgment of Judge B A Corkill, 31 January 2017) COSTS – CONSENT – consent order made.

[2017] NZEmpC 5 Edminstin v Sanford Ltd (Reasons for Interlocutory Judgment (No 2) of Chief Judge G L Colgan, 27 January 2017) RECALL OF WITNESS – REASONS – disclosure and inspection ongoing obligations – plaintiff sought orders but need to do also plaintiff responsibility therefore no costs in favour of successful applicant.

Decision Date: 24 January 2017. Privacy Act 1993

[2016] NZEmpC 176 Radius Residential Care Limited v The New Zealand Nurses Organisation Inc and Others (Judgment of Chief Judge G L Colgan, 21 December 2016) COSTS – downward adjustment to reflect defendants’ partial success and discontinuance of some claims – set at 33% - $21,124 ordered.

[2016] NZEmpC 167 A Labour Inspector of the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment v Tech 5 Recruitment (Judgment of the Full Court, 16 December, 2016) PREMIUMS – whether employment agreements contained premium clause – s 12A Wages Protection Act – the meaning of “premium” defined – trade-testing costs were premium – employment agreements containing obligations to pay are “seeking a premium” – challenge successful.

[2016] NZEmpC 163 Darren John Tobin v Rapid Labels Limited (Interlocutory Judgment by Consent of Judge Christina Inglis, 8 December 2016) CONSENT ON COSTS –costs ordered by Authority to be paid into Court pending outcome of challenge.

[2016] NZEmpC 160 Andy Nathan v C3 Limited (Costs Judgment of Judge M E Perkins,  1 December 2016) COSTS FOLLOWING DISCONTINUANCE – discontinuance following remittance by Court of Appeal back to Employment Court – comparison with Guideline Scale – defendant’s costs excessive – each party successful at different stages - plaintiff in financial hardship – no costs awarded.

Lawyer issued proceedings personally against another lawyer and his client alleging maintenance / champerty, abuse of process, unlawful conspiracy to injure and defamation. The other lawyer had previously complained about the first lawyer, and those complaints were part of charges brought against the first lawyer before the Lawyers and Conveyancers Disciplinary Tribunal. The complainant (second lawyer) alleged the first lawyer had commenced proceedings for the purpose of intimidating him and his client, and to gain discovery of his files. Standards Committee agreed, and found unsatisfactory conduct by reason of breach of r 2.3 CCCR ( legal processes to be used for proper purposes only.) Committee also found breaches of rr10 and 13.2. Applicant argued that the CCCR did not apply because he was not providing regulated services. LCRO agreed the lawyer was not providing regulated services, but CCCR apply according to their terms - EA v ABO LCRO 237/2010 applied. LCRO reversed finding of un…

[2016] NZEmpC 150 Whanau Tahi Ltd v Kiran Dasari (Costs judgment of Judge M E Perkins, 17 November 2016) COSTS – indemnity costs claimed – usual costs principles appropriate – guideline Scale of Costs useful guide – costs of $18,500 awarded against plaintiff.

[2016] NZEmpC 151 Darren Brett Carr, Labour Inspector v Vishaal Kumar Sharma (Sentencing Notes of Judge M E Perkins, 17 November 2016) OBSTRUCTING A LABOUR INSPECTOR – GUILTY PLEA – SENTENCING – s 235 charge - guilty plea entered  –criminal jurisdiction of Employment Court and Sentencing Act applies – principles of sentencing applied –factors to be considered in discharge without conviction – discharge without conviction - $500 towards costs ordered against defendant.

Complaint / Committee declined to take further action on complaints / complaint lawyer incompetent / inadequate supervision / misleading court / conflict of interest / failure to respond to client / fees complaint / Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008 rule 5.11 / rule 13.5 / GL v UE LCRO 206/2010  (21 October 2011) / HELD / Office not correct forum for some complaints / fees fair and reasonable / breach of rule 5.11 / unsatisfactory conduct /  Committee’s decision modified / section 211(1)(a)

[2016] NZEmpC 142 Andrew Leota v Chief Executive of the Ministry of Social Development [Judgment of Judge M E Perkins, 3 November 2016) BREACH OF COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT – BREACH OF CONFIDENCE – withdrawal of paid sick leave – leave entitlement not open-ended – leave withdrawn in accordance with agreement – unauthorised detrimental use of information not found – no breach of confidence – costs reserved.