Search Results

1. Ransfield v Whaanga - Town Section 90 Mahia and Town Section 91 Mahia (2012) 16 Takitimu MB 130 (16 TKT 130) [pdf, 137 KB]

   ...Solicitors: Langley Twigg Solicitors, PO Box 446, Napier Attention: Cara Bennett P Nee Harland, PO Box 8025, Havelock North Attention: Peter Nee Harland 16 Tākitimu MB 131 The Applications [1] The Ihaka Whaanga Whānau Trust have filed the following applications: i. For determination of ownership of a dwelling situated on Mahia Township Sections 90 and 91 in terms of s 18(1)(a) of Te Ture Whenua Māori Act 1993 (the Act); ii. To recover damages for trespass and inj...

2. [2014] NZEmpC 128 Huang v Li [pdf, 118 KB]

   ...conclusions reached in the Employment Court, namely the forging of documents and for working in paid employment (unrelated to the parties in this case) without a Work Permit. c) The applicant has already advised the Court that he is unable to pay the filing fee for his application for a rehearing, and has further advised the applicant on a number of occasions that he would not be paying any costs awarded against him. d) The applicant has had costs of $2,438 awarded against him...

3. Sionepulu v Downer and Police (Costs) [2012] NZHRRT 22 [pdf, 76 KB]

   ...and the Tribunal was, in effect, to send his wife “the bill”. Ms Sionepulu was not in the hearing room at the time this stance was taken in somewhat defiant terms. The Tribunal nevertheless made provision in the timetable for Ms Sionepulu to file submissions in opposition to the costs applications. It will be clear from the preceding paragraphs that no such submissions have been filed. [16] The Tribunal has been left with the task of addressing the applications by Downer and by th...

4. [2014] NZEmpC 16 Gapuzan v Pratt Whitney Air New Zealand Services second interlocutory [pdf, 49 KB]

   ...defendant Judgment: 12 February 2014 SECOND INTERLOCUTORY JUDGMENT OF JUDGE A A COUCH [1] The history of this matter is summarised in my first interlocutory judgment dated 29 August 2013.1 [2] The plaintiff took that opportunity by filing a third amended statement of claim on 17 September 2013. The defendant very quickly responded with an application to strike out parts of that statement. It is that application to strike out which is decided in this judgment....

5. BC v YT LCRO 215 / 2010 (1 April 2011) [pdf, 83 KB]

   ...Similarly, although it is not directly relevant at this point, he advised that by “corruption”, he means circumstances in which a regulatory body does not function in the way it should, and likened it to the “corruption” of a computer file. Procedure [14] In his letter of 26 October 2010 which accompanied the application for review, the Applicant advised that he wished to be heard in person in support of his application. He also advised that he would be making submissio...

6. Halesowen v Kelso LCRO 175-176 / 2009 (18 November 2009) [pdf, 91 KB]

   ...and that this was inconsistent with the Committee’s duty of impartiality. The legal advice obtained by the Committee is privileged to the Committee. The submissions on behalf of Ms Halesowen in this regard are speculative. I have had the entire file of the Standards Committee made available to me including the opinion referred to. There is nothing in the file or in the opinion which suggests that this concern of the applicant is well founded. Relevance of Mäori Land Court decisio...

7. Wai 2180 Taihape inquiry newsletter 3 June 2016 [pdf, 1 MB]

   ...Māori land retention and alienation Craig Innes WTU #A15 Māori in the Taihape inquiry district: a sociodemographic scoping exercise Georgie Craw WTU #A28 In directions released earlier this year, the Tribunal granted an extension to the filing date of CFRT research to 20 May 2016. Staff are very pleased to announce that all research has been completed in the CFRT research programme. We extend thanks to the researchers who committed to this final deadline despite the minor del...

8. ST v CBU LCRO 125 / 2011 (10 December 2012) [pdf, 97 KB]

   ...paid by order of the Court and reiterated his complaint that …the basic falsehood from [CBU] was their claim to be entitled to payment in circumstances where they had received no instructions, had no retainer and had not done any work. They filed application papers in the High Court in support of their false claims! [22] The Standards Committee determination was communicated to the parties on 30 May 2011. It determined that CBU had issued its invoices and winding-up applica...

9. Chung and Lok v Yap [2014] NZIACDT 66 (30 May 2014) [pdf, 149 KB]

   ...adviser breached the Code of Conduct as he did not properly evaluate the complainant’s immigration prospects and his delivery of services through unlicensed staff breached his professional duties. The Statement of Complaint [8] The Registrar filed a statement of complaint. It says the complainants lodged the complaint on wider grounds, but the Registrar identified material that supports the following grounds of complaint: [8.1] He breached clauses 2.1(b) and 3 of the Code in relati...

10. Chaudhary v The Real Estate Agents Authority (CAC 414) NZREADT 12 [pdf, 187 KB]

    ...[40] The complaint by Mr Rajan and Mrs Devi is remitted back to the Committee for consideration. [41] Pursuant to s 113 of the Act, the Tribunal draws the parties’ attention to s 116 of the Act, which sets out appeal rights. Any appeal must be filed in the High Court within 20 working days of the date on which the Tribunal’s decision is served. The procedure to be followed is set out in part 20 of the High Court Rules. _________________ _________________ ___________...