The Limitation Act 2010 came into force on 1 January 2011 but as most limitation periods are six years the limitation periods prescribed under the Act will need to be considered from 1 January 2017 onwards as this is six years after the Act came into force.
..On 6 October 2016 the Court of Appeal issued its judgment in AFFCO New Zealand Limited v NZ Meat Workers and Related Trades Union Inc [2016] NZCA 482, upholding an earlier Employment Court decision in favour of the union. The basis for that decision is explained below, but was essentially that AFFCO’s ‘seasonal’ workers had the same status as “employees” under the lockout provisions of the Employment Relations Act 2000 (ERA), even although they were between engagements during the off season when alleged lockouts at meat processing plants occurred. Post-employment obligations under the collective agreement, but more particularly to re-employ according to seniority, constrained AFFCO’s future conduct transforming its refusal to offer re-employment into an unlawful lockout. ..
The Court of Appeal’s decision to uphold the dismissal of a 51-year-old airline pilot for sexual harassment because of the “inherent implausibility” of an innocent purpose and accidental touching in all the circumstances provides helpful guidance that will aid employers in deciding whether serious misconduct has occurred justifying dismissal, whilst cautioning employers that the requirements of procedural fairness may vary depending on the circumstances.
The contra proferentem rule – the rule of interpretation that says the words of written documents are interpreted more forcibly against the party putting forward the document – is long-standing in contract law and insurance law. But a string of appellate decisions have re-emphasised that particular importance must be given to the language chosen by the parties to express their intentions, and the mere fact that the natural meaning of a contract has worked out badly or even disastrously for one of the parties is not a reason for departing from the natural language. So when exactly does contra proferentem apply? Two recent decisions of the English Court of Appeal helpfully explain the basis for and role of this rule.
..In Sun & Others v Peninsula Road Limited (in rec and in liq) [2016] NZCA 427 (9 September 2016) the Court of Appeal considered the right of a party to a contract to cancel the contract or be treated as relieved from further performance for 'anticipatory breach’. ..
A series of recent decisions from the Employment Relations Authority shows once again the Authority’s preparedness to strike down 90-day trial provisions in employment agreements based on legalistic and rigid grounds. ..
A UK Court has held that case law establishing constraints on the exercise of contractual powers and discretions does not apply to a contractual right of cancellation.
..
Body Corporate 346799 v KNZ International Co LTD - BC201661516 is a recent strike out decision of Palmer J. The Court considered whether the inclusion of additional defects in defective building proceedings amounted to a new cause of action. If they were found to be a new cause of action, as opposed to mere further particulars, their inclusion would be time-barred. ..
The England and Wales Court of Appeal (EWCA) has upheld a High Court decision granting injunctions, referred to as website-blocking orders (the orders) against a number of internet service providers (ISPs) in the UK, requiring those ISPs to block access to a number of websites accused of selling counterfeit luxury goods. ..