Search Results

1. [2023] NZEmpC 20 Henry v South Waikato Achievement Trust [pdf, 385 KB]

   ...inappropriate investigation by questioning A about the alleged assault by C. An aspect of the allegation was that the time delay between the alleged assault and the interview was significant and that A was on the autistic spectrum. [101] The Trust did not explain what aspect of this complaint might give rise to a finding of serious misconduct. Nevertheless, in Mr Sinclair’s preliminary decision he considered that this allegation, along with the first and second ones, w...

2. Hastie and Dredge TRI-2023-100-001 Procedural Order 5 [pdf, 251 KB]

   ...claimants’ and the sixth respondent’s respective relevant interests.24 [100] On the one hand, a claimant should not be lightly deprived of the right to sue a respondent who they allege is liable to them under an otherwise eligible claim. [101] On the other hand, a respondent should not be required to answer a claim in circumstances where the claimant’s inordinate and inexcusable delay seriously prejudices that respondent to an extent which is inequitable. The analogy...

3. [2022] NZREADT 1 - DU v Real Estate Agents Authority & DC (1 February 2022) [pdf, 333 KB]

   ...daughter and later the vendor on 19 December 2019 about such a process, but it was declined. The vendor was worried that if the appellant became part of the process, the agreement with the purchasers would fall over. Disclosure of subsidence [101] According to counsel, the licensee was not aware of subsidence at the property before the appellant raised it. He then became aware of a potential defect. It was never confirmed by an expert. The licensee in turn raised it with the ven...

4. Nathan v Accident Compensation Corporation [2022] NZACC 206 [pdf, 455 KB]

   IN THE DISTRICT COURT AT WELLINGTON I TE KŌTI-Ā-ROHE KI TE WHANGANUI-A-TARA [2022] NZACC 206 ACR 442/13 UNDER THE ACCIDENT COMPENSATION ACT 2001 IN THE MATTER OF AN APPEAL UNDER SECTION 149 OF THE ACT BETWEEN M NATHAN Appellant AND ACCIDENT COMPENSATION CORPORATION Respondent Hearings: 24 November 2021; 6 September 2022 Heard at: Auckland/Tamaki Makaurau Evidence and supplementary submissions completed: 5 September 202

5. [2023] NZEnvC 105 Wilson v Waikato Regional Council [pdf, 720 KB]

   WILSON v WAKATO REGIONAL COUNCIL – FINAL DECISION IN THE ENVIRONMENT COURT AT CHRISTCHURCH I TE KŌTI TAIAO O AOTEAROA KI ŌTAUTAHI Decision No. [2023] NZEnvC 105 IN THE MATTER of the Resource Management Act 1991 AND of an appeal under s120 of the Act BETWEEN WARWICK SUTHERLAND WILSON (ENV-2020-AKL-51) Appellant AND WAIKATO REGIONAL COUNCIL Respondent AND OHINAU AQUACULTURE LIMITED Applicant Court: Environment Judge J J M Hassan Environment Commissioner K A

6. Final-Technical-Assessment-F-Hydrology-and-Flooding-updated-23-Dec-2022_Part1.pdf [pdf, 20 MB]

   Barristers and Solicitors Wellington Solicitor Acting: David Allen / Thaddeus Ryan Email: david.allen@buddlefindlay.com / thaddeus.ryan@buddlefindlay.com Tel 64 4 462 0423 Fax 64 4 499 4141 PO Box 2694 DX SP20201 Wellington 6011 IN THE MATTER OF the Resource Management Act 1991 AND IN THE MATTER OF applications for resource consents and notices of requirement in relation to the Ōtaki to North of Levin Project BY WAKA KOTAHI NZ TRANSPORT AGENCY

7. Hipango v Ngaurukehu Section 3 and Other Blocks Inc. - Rangiwaea 4F14A2C (2023) 473 Aotea MB 25 (473 AOT 25) [pdf, 465 KB]

   ...Sections 269 to 303 of the MAA/53 are relevant. [26] The effect of ss 275 to 276 of the MAA/53 was that the land vested in an Incorporation was held on trust for the shareholders in proportion to their equitable interests. 6 141 Aotea MB 95-101 (141 AOT 95-101). 7 Amended submission of counsel, John Koning, 5 August 2022; Submission of counsel, Edward Unsworth, 1 September 2023. 473 Aotea MB 232 [27] These equitable interests could have been acquired under s 277 of the MA...

8. LCRO 200/2020 SK and WP v AQ (27 October 2023) [pdf, 292 KB]

   ...account all reasonable fee factors specified in r 9.1 that were applicable to the circumstances. [100] For clarity, I find that the provisions of the Firm’s terms of engagement do not constitute a fee agreement for the purposes of r 9.1. [101] This leaves three reasonable fee factors under r 9.1, namely, in the order discussed below: (f) the complexity of the matter and the difficulty or novelty of the questions involved; (d) the urgency and circumstances in which the matter...

9. LCRO 126/2023 EG v HJ (28 November 2023) [pdf, 283 KB]

   ...case of failing to repay the debt of NZD600,000 to Mr OB by 10AM on 30 March 2022. If this promise fails to be kept, twenty thousand dollars are to be paid per day for the interest. 26 March 2022 EG (Signed) Debtor OB (Signed) [101] It has not been explained how any lawyer could reasonably consider this document to constitute an agreement for the sale and purchase of land between [Company A] and the creditor. [102] The second problematical concept is the referenc...

10. [2023] NZEnvC 255 Abrahamson v Canterbury Regional Council [pdf, 290 KB]

    ...contravene s9. It held that where a resource consent is granted for any proposal which includes some activities that are permitted, such activities will be protected against any subsequent changes to the plan as an existing land use under s10. [101] The HC decision in Cable Bay Wine31 had also referred to Doogue J’s discussion of the bundling concept in Zindia, noting that bundling applied in the orthodox sense cannot be construed as meaning that where resource consent is grant...