Search Results

1. [2021] NZREADT 20 - Sheldon (5 May 2021) [pdf, 233 KB]

   ...for similar conduct, in similar circumstances. The Tribunal should impose the least punitive penalty that is appropriate in the circumstances. While there is an element of punishment, rehabilitation is an important consideration.4 [9] Section 110(4) of the Act provides that if after hearing a charge against a licensee the Tribunal is satisfied that the licensee has engaged in unsatisfactory conduct, the Tribunal may make any of the orders that a Complaints Assessment Committee may...

2. [2021] NZEmpC 79 McKay v Wanaka Pharmacy Ltd [pdf, 227 KB]

   ...dealt with on the papers. The defendants provided financial information but chose not to file submissions in the Authority. [8] On 23 December 2020 the Authority ordered WPL and WSL to comply with its 16 June 2020 determination and the order at [110(b)] of that determination, and pay to Ms McKay the holiday pay sum of $57,334.24 by 3 February 2021.3 It also ordered that WPL and WSL pay to Ms McKay the sum of $1,325 in costs and $71.56 in reimbursement of the filing fee. [9] Desp...

3. Complaints Assessment Committee 404 v Hawkins [2017] NZREADT 35 [pdf, 193 KB]

   ...similar conduct, in similar circumstances. The Tribunal should impose the least punitive penalty that is appropriate in the circumstances. While there is an element of punishment, rehabilitation is an important consideration.10 [14] Section 110(2) of the Act sets out the orders the Tribunal may make by way of penalty. As may be relevant to the present case the Tribunal may: [a] Make any of the orders that a Complaints Assessment Committee may impose under s 93 of the Act (these...

4. Pukeroa Oruawhata Trust - Pukeroa Oruawhata Trust (2005) 293 Rotorua MB 74 (293 ROT 74) [pdf, 503 KB]

   ...variations to the trust order, taking into account the specific circumstances of this case. Annual general meeting 16 October 2004 [8] By all accounts the annual general meeting was well attended. Some 211 beneficial owners were present compared to 110 from a previous general meeting. This was despite the fact that, according to the Trust, the secretaries had inadvertently failed to post out some 120 notices to beneficial owners. While the trustees raised concerns as to the "...

5. Auckland Standards Committee 1 v Hooker [2020] NZLCDT 10 [pdf, 136 KB]

   ...going to do so was also found to constitute unsatisfactory conduct. [9] The second matter occurred in December 2016. The LCRO found that Mr Hooker’s failure to release client funds on request was unsatisfactory conduct leading to a breach of s 110(1)(b) of the Act. The clients wished to terminate their retainer with Mr Hooker and requested the return of funds held on trust. Mr Hooker did not do so, and the funds remained undisbursed for just under six years. [10] The Committe...

6. [2020] NZEmpC 89 Shalini Ltd v A Labour Inspector [pdf, 185 KB]

   ...before the Authority. The statement of claim alleges that the Authority erred by 3 Daleson, above n 2. 4 At [44] and [46] citing Preet PVT, above n 2, and Labour Inspector v Prabh Ltd [2018] NZEmpC 110, [2018] ERNZ 310. failing to accord any weight to the parties’ agreed approach to penalties arising from the settlement. This point was mentioned in passing in submissions, but appropriately not taken further. The Author...

7. Complaints Assessment Committee 403 v Zhang [2018] NZREADT 53 [pdf, 179 KB]

   ...similar conduct, in similar circumstances. The Tribunal should impose the least punitive penalty that is appropriate in the circumstances. While there is an element of punishment, rehabilitation is an important consideration.4 [11] Section 110(2) of the Act sets out the orders the Tribunal may make by way of penalty. As relevant to the present case the Tribunal may: [a] Make any of the orders that a Complaints Assessment Committee may impose under s 93 of the Act (these include...

8. Te Manutukutuku Issue 20 [pdf, 2.7 MB]

   ...the Govern­ ment called a hui at parliament on Tuesday 16 February 1993 to consult Maori on the appointment of commISSIOners. The 14-page report is ava ilable on request from the Tribunal's office. THE WAITANGI TRIBUNAL, Seabridge House, 110 Featherston Street, PO Box 5022, DX 8101, Wellington Tel (04) 4993666 Fax (04) 4993676 Excerpts from the Treaty of Waitangi (Fisheries Claims) Settlement Act 1992 Following are excerpts from the new Fisheries Act which change the Treaty...

9. Te Manutukutuku Issue 22 [pdf, 2.7 MB]

   ...Tribunal member since 1986 Heard the foLLowing claims: Orakei; Mangonui Sewerage; Muriwhenua Fishing; Ngai Tahu Land and Sea Fisheries; Ngati Rangiteaorere; Te Roroa; Muriwhenua Land (still under inquiry) THE WAITANGI TRIBUNAL, Seabridge House, 110 Featherston Street, PO Box 5022, DX 8101 , Wellington Tel (04) 4993666 Fax (04) 4993676 Ngawha Geothermal Resource Report The Waitangi Tribunal has reported on an urgent claim by several hapu of the Ngapuhi iwi concerning their ownersh...

10. [2022] NZEnvC 027 Vortac New Zealand Limited v Western Bay of Plenty District Council [pdf, 209 KB]

    ...Christchurch City Council v Hampton Decision C115/2002 at [7]; e) Other cases where the ability to apply to vary or cancel an enforcement order where there has been a change in relevant circumstances include: i) Auckland Council v Mao [2017] NZEnvC 110; and ii) Banora v Auckland Council [2019] NZEnvC 198. f) Vortac does not contest that a jury found that the works required a resource consent or that the works were in a floodable area or that it would be inappropriate to cancel...