The trade-mark dispute triggered when Sacked Kiwi demanded that Win Kiwi Limited stop using Fired Kiwi, including the allegations made, the response and the relevant IPONZ registration context.
Industry news, practical commentary, and real-world employment law lessons from the coalface in New Zealand. Short updates, longer opinion pieces, and anonymised stories that highlight what goes wrong (and how to avoid it).
Updates, commentary, and practical lessons from the coalface. This is where I publish industry news, my opinion on employment law issues, and real-world stories (some anonymised, some not) that show how disputes start, how they escalate, and how they can be resolved.
Some articles in this section are short and timely. Others are longer opinion pieces or breakdowns of common failure points I see in practice. If you are looking for structured guides and explainer articles, browse the main articles and topics as well.
Employment disputes are rarely about one single event. They usually build from poor process, poor communication, missing documentation, or decisions that get locked in too early. I use this section to call out patterns I see repeatedly, and to explain the practical reality of what happens in MBIE mediation, the Employment Relations Authority (ERA), and sometimes the Employment Court.
If you are in a live dispute, treat deadlines and evidence seriously from day one. For employees, that may include the time limits for raising a Personal Grievance (PG). For employers, that means avoiding rushed responses and preserving the record before memories fade or systems overwrite.
The trade-mark dispute triggered when Sacked Kiwi demanded that Win Kiwi Limited stop using Fired Kiwi, including the allegations made, the response and the relevant IPONZ registration context.
Shine Lawyers applied to IPONZ to revoke No Win No Fee Kiwi Limited's registered 'No Win No Fee Kiwi' trade mark for non-use while pursuing its own 'No Win, No Fee No Nonsense' applications. No Win No Fee Kiwi filed a counterstatement and evidence of use.
![Menzies v Corrigan [2025] NZEmpC 186 - employment advocate and employment lawyer conduct](/Blog/articles/Costs/menzies_corrigan_advocate_lawyer_conduct/menzies_corrigan_01.jpg)
Menzies v Corrigan concerned an ERA compliance order that required a company director personally to take steps to fund a liquidated employer so grievance remedies could be paid. The challenge raised questions about s 137(2), separate corporate personality and the reach of compliance jurisdiction.
![Joyce v Ultimate Siteworks Limited [2024] NZEmpC 204 - costs, interlocutory outcomes and representative conduct](/Blog/articles/Costs/Joyce_Ultimate_Siteworks_advocate_lawyer_conduct/joyce_ultimate_siteworks_01.jpg)
Joyce v Ultimate Siteworks concerned costs after a substantive Employment Court matter and four interlocutory disputes, including an unsuccessful sanctions application and a withdrawn request understood by the Court as contempt-like. The judgment also addressed allegations about whether representative conduct had increased the other side's costs.