New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Contracting out

Legal area

Court

11 Sept 2015

JETSTAR AIRWAYS LIMITED v GREENSLADE [2015] NZCA 432

Citation

[2015] ERNZ 71
Court

Court of Appeal

The expression 'rest breaks' in s69ZH(2) must be read consistently with Part 6D and denotes breaks during the defined work period; CAO 48 does not impose the type of rest break required by s69ZH(2); although the CAO 48 regime, if it had required such breaks, would be treated as arising 'by or under another enactment' because Australian AOC privileges are authorised under NZ law (Civil Aviation Act s11B), that point was immaterial because CAO 48 in fact did not require rest breaks of the statutory character; clause 19 of the employment agreement imports s69ZD entitlements and does not unlawful…
27 Mar 2013

DWG V JCF HC BLE CIV-2012-406-251

Citation

openlaw-5ba4d133_86f1_4387_aae6_469c143ce2ff.pdf
Court

High Court

The High Court held that the parties were in a de facto relationship, the s 21 agreement met formalities but produced a substantial disparity (JCF receiving effectively one‑eighth of the home's net value) which, when considered with evidence of controlling and abusive conduct and exploitation of JCF's urgent need to purchase another property, meant giving effect to the agreement would cause serious injustice under s 21J; the transfer of $300,000 to a discretionary trust controlled by DWG did not compensate JCF, so the agreement was properly set aside, although orders compelling the trustees t…
29 Nov 2011

NZ PROFESSIONAL FIREFIGHTERS UNION V NZ FIRE SERVICE COMMISSION COA CA439/2011

Citation

COA CA439/2011
Court

Court of Appeal

The Court of Appeal held that compliance orders cannot be used to delay or prevent lawful strike action or to circumvent the Act's exclusive regime for strikes and lockouts; provisions in a bargaining agreement that effectively truncate statutory strike or notice time limits amount to unlawful contracting out under s238; accordingly the Employment Court erred in issuing compliance orders to delay the lawful strike notices and in purporting to prevent the proposed strikes.
10 Jul 2007

Accident Compensation Corporation v Bailey

Citation

[2007] NZACC 152
Court

District Court

The five-year single payment assignment transferred only the claimant's right to receive the specified quarterly monetary payment for that period; it did not extinguish statutory rights to reassessment. Any purported agreement to preclude reassessment would amount to an unlawful contracting out contrary to s299 and cannot alter the reassessment rights preserved by Clause 61 and s123(2)(b). The Reviewer's decision quashing ACC's refusal to arrange reassessment was correct.
8 Jun 2007

S.T.L. LINEHAUL LTD V AB EQUIPMENT LTD HC AK CIV 2006-404-007292

Citation

openlaw-b122f56e_568b_47fe_a089_663efb10c2f5.pdf
Court

High Court

The judge rightly held that AB established a qualifying mistake of fact and law because AB's belief in a contractual guarantee had a reasonable foundation and adequately explained the delay; S.T.L. was not materially prejudiced by the delay after the one-year limit expired; the District Court judge properly exercised the discretionary power under s19(5) to grant leave and it was not legally erroneous or plainly wrong to do so.
27 Feb 2006

Griffin v Accident Compensation Corporation

Citation

[2006] NZACC 51
Court

District Court

The December 1998 agreement could not lawfully terminate the appellant's statutory entitlement because the Act requires a formal determination under s37A or an assessment under s51 to cease weekly compensation; no such determination was made so the appellant remained incapacitated from his pre-accident bakery employment and the correct pre-incapacity income for calculating weekly compensation is his bakery earnings, not his Valley Craft Furniture earnings; accordingly the respondent's June 2000 calculation was incorrect and the respondent must recalculate and pay arrears and reinstate full co…
18 May 2004

JUST ONE LIFE LIMITED V QUEENSTOWN LAKES DISTRICT COUNCIL And Anor CA CA72/03

Citation

openlaw-1923c12c_6ac1_4711_88a6_b3a3d118b369.pdf
Court

Court of Appeal

A local authority cannot validly delegate its RMA quasi-judicial decision-making powers to a company; the word 'officer' in s34(4) RMA is limited to natural persons who can be subject to the local authority's control, and delegation to a company (which must sub-delegate to employees) is incompatible with s34(4)'s limits on sub-delegation. Consequently the purported delegation to Civic was not authorised under s34(4).
16 Dec 1997

Keil v Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Corporation

Citation

[1997] NZACC 263
Court

District Court

On the balance of probabilities the appellant's incapacity from the 1987 accident continued uninterrupted to his return to New Zealand; accordingly he is entitled to reinstatement of earnings-related weekly compensation from the date of his return despite the prior rehabilitation agreement and the absence of contemporaneous overseas medical certificates.