Phillip D. Green - Barrister

By: Phillip D. Green Barrister  06-Dec-2011
Keywords: Security Consultants, Medical Laboratory, Class Action

  • R v McNeish [1982] 1 NZLR 247

  • Fletcher Timber Ltd v Attorney-General [1984] 1 NZLR 290 (Public law)

  • State Insurance General Manager v McHale [1992] 2 NZLR 399 (Insurance)

  • South Pacific Manufacturing Co Ltd v NZ Security Consultants & Investigations [1992] 2 NZLR 282 (CA) (Establishing a duty of care)

  • NZ Rail Ltd v National Union of Railway Workers of NZ Inc (No 1) [1992] 3 ERNZ 964 (Anton Piller application)

  • Cook v NZ Rail Ltd [1993] 2 ERNZ 1100 (Injunction: principles to be applied when breach anticipated)

  • NZ Rail Ltd v National Union of Railway Workers of NZ Inc (No 2) [1992] 3 ERNZ 966 (Essential service – grant of interim injunction)

  • NZ Medical Laboratory Workers Union Inc v Capital Coast Health Ltd [1994] 2 ERNZ 93 (Bypassing authorised agent)

  • NZ Rail Ltd v Employment Court [1995] 3 NZLR 179 (CA) (Rights of judicial review)

  • Capital Coast Health Ltd v NZ Medical Laboratory Workers Union Inc [1996] 1 NZLR 7(CA) (Bypassing authorised agent – contempt of Court)

  • Tau v Durie [1996] 2 NZLR 190 (Public interest immunity)

  • The Taranaki Report: Kaupapa Tuataki: Waitangi Tribunal Report into the claim of Nga Iwi o Taranaki: 1996

  • NZ Medical Laboratory Workers Union Inc v Capital Coast Health Ltd [1997] 1 ERNZ 1 (Parties to a contract – meaning of ‘negotiation’)

  • Kelly v Tranz Rail Ltd [1997] 1 ERNZ 476 (Discrimination against striking employees and a class action right to strike)

  • Wilson & Horton Ltd v Attorney-General & NZI & Others [1997] 2 NZLR 513 (CA) (Reasonable foreseeability – materiality)

  • Te Heu Heu v Attorney-General [1999] 1 NZLR 98 (Public Law)

  • Tranz Rail Ltd v Rail & Maritime Transport Union (Inc) [1999] 1 ERNZ 460 (CA) (Fringe benefit and legitimate expectations)

  • Tuwharetoa Maori Trust Board v Taupo District Council [1999] NZAR 267 (Council bias)

  • Tutty v Blackmore Ltd [1999] 1 ERNZ 587 (Full Court) – (Employment contract agreements to resolve disputes through mediation and/or arbitration)

  • Beal v Jardine Risk Consultants Ltd [1999] 2 ERNZ 254 (Forum non conveniens)

  • Jardine Risk Consultants Ltd v Beal [2000] 1 ERNZ 405 (CA) (Conflict of laws)

  • Price Waterhouse v Kwan [2000] 3 NZLR 39 (CA) (Duty of care and auditors)

  • Kennedy v Taupo District Council [2001] NZRMA 467 (HC) (Judicial review)

  • Te Whanganui a Tara Me Ona Takiwa: Report on the Wellington District: Waitangi Tribunal Report 2003 (Report on the claims of various Maori iwi in respect of the district surrounding Wellington Harbour (Te Whanganui a Tara) and extending to Heretaunga (the Hutt Valley) and the southwest coast – the district referred to in the 1840s as the Port Nicholson block)

  • Keywords: Class Action, Maritime Transport, Medical Laboratory, Railway Workers, Risk Consultants, Security Consultants,

    Contact Phillip D. Green Barrister


    Print this page

    Other products and services from Phillip D. Green Barrister



    By balancing legal and non-legal, age and gender experience, Phillip and Nicola draw on a broad scope of professional and life experiences, insights and skill bases, which they bring to the mediation process and the settlement table. While they both mediate individually, they prefer the co-mediation model, combining Phillip's extensive legal expertise with Nicola's interpersonal and relational skills and experience.


    Phillip D. Green - Arbitration Services

    Typically commercial contracts now contain dispute resolution provisions which state that in the event of a dispute the parties shall first try and mediate the issues but if that should fail then the issue will go to arbitration. Parties can enter into an agreement to arbitrate a future dispute in the event that it arises, or if no such agreement exists they can agree to arbitrate after the dispute has arisen.


    Phillip D. Green - Mediation Services

    Prior to the agreed mediation date I generally call a second pre-mediation meeting, again usually by phone, to confirm that the parties are on track and to see whether or not they need additional input or assistance in preparing themselves for the mediation.