Search Results

1. GH v UF LCRO 22 / 2011 (9 November 2011) [pdf, 84 KB]

   ...Applicant expressed his disappointment that “an agreement in a letter, which was an implied contract, from a lawyer and a reputable [North Island] law firm can be flouted.” Considerations [19] This decision is based on all of the material on the file and such additional information as was provided for the review and at the review hearing. An Applicant-only hearing may be a first step in the review process and offers the opportunity to obtain greater clarification of the issues,...

2. ZA v YB LCRO 333/2012 (15 August 2014) [pdf, 89 KB]

   ...main, Mr ZA complains that Mr YB did not perform adequately at the judicial settlement conference. In the first instance the parameters of the case and the negotiating position for a settlement conference are established by the pleadings already filed. The costs assessor had regard to all of the material on Mr YB’s file and did not in any way suggest that Mr YB’s work was substandard. In addition, the outcome of the settlement conference was positive for Mr ZA and it seems to...

3. Nicholls v Nicholls - Part Papaaroha 6B Block [2011] Māori Appellate Court MB 64 (2011 APPEAL 64) [pdf, 93 KB]

   ...injunction against the Appellants, which were dismissed by the learned Judge in a judgment dated 5 October 2009. 2 That decision is not subject to appeal. [2] The Appellants, having received a copy of the costs judgment on 9 April 2010, then filed an appeal against that decision on 9 June 2010. [3] The issue for determination is whether or not in exercising his discretion to decline an award of costs per s 79 of Te Ture Whenua Māori Act 1993 (the Act) the Judge applied the approp...

4. Hooker Family Trust v R & B Plastering Limited [2011] NZWHT Auckland 41 [pdf, 80 KB]

   ...reach a settlement rather than spending it on preparing for the hearing. That was a reasonable course of action to take, and in the interests of justice I gave permission for Mr Brown to give oral evidence at the hearing even though he had not filed a written response or a witness statement before it. Mr Schnauer also made submissions. Page | 6 [9] Mr Hooker said tenders were called and a contract was entered into to remediate the house. He himself arranged for the bui...

5. [2018] NZEnvC 019 Falvey v Christchurch City Council [pdf, 2 MB]

   ...hearing commenced, the applicant requested an adjournment of the hearing. This was to allow the applicant the opportunity to seek the approvals required from the road controlling authority. The request was made after the Council's planner filed a supplementary brief of evidence attaching a recent opinion from an in-house lawyer. The lawyer's opinion was that the occupation "could not" be authorised, nor could the authority grant a licence in perpetuity to landscape...

6. LCRO 202/2016 and 6/2017 JI v ZY [pdf, 153 KB]

   ...of the WV and XU Trust: Mr WV, Mrs XU and KO Trustees Ltd. Mrs XU immediately forgave the entire debt. [8] By 2 June 2015, Mr JI had received a request from STI Law (STI) by fax advising that Mr WV and Ms ZY had separated, and seeking to uplift files relating to matters on which he had acted for Mr WV and Ms ZY.4 [9] On 2 June 2015, Mr JI replied to STI to the effect that the firm had only acted for Ms ZY on the purchase of [property 1] in 2013, and not in any other matter. Ms...

7. Ross and Ellis v Te Moni - Otumoko B4 (2010) 2 Waikato Maniapoto MB 243 (2 WMN 243) [pdf, 62 KB]

   ...At no time have either of the defendants become an owner in the block. [18] More importantly at no stage have either of the defendants made a formal request to the trustees to give their consent to an occupation order. Nor have the defendants filed an application for an occupation order with the Māori Land Court. [19] At best, their right to occupy the block, or at least a part of it, was at the behest of Mr Ellis. The plaintiffs have pleaded and I accept that what happened was M...

8. Cross - Horowhenua 9A6B1 (2016) 355 Aotea MB 199 (355 AOT 199) [pdf, 198 KB]

   ...land by virtue of the provisions of the Māori Affairs Amendment Act 1967. The subsequent transfers and the principle of indefeasibility did not alter the status of the land. [7] Following the issue of my interim decision, counsel for Ms Cross filed a memorandum dated 26 May 2016 advising that no further submissions would be made in relation to the change of status application and that a final decision could be issued. [8] Accordingly, I am satisfied that the status of the land is...

9. [2016] NZCA 21 CA616/2015 Nisha v LSG Sky Chefs NZ Limited [pdf, 403 KB]

   ...10 At [143]. 11 At [144]. 12 At [148]. 13 At [146]. 14 At [156]. 15 At [154]. 16 At [158]. Application for leave to appeal [8] The application for leave to appeal filed in October 2015 advanced seven different grounds. In submissions filed in November 2015 those seven grounds were recast as five. Before us Mr Goddard QC sensibly recast the argument one further time. His primary argument was that the

10. Tully v Yerman [2012] NZIACDT 39 (31 July 2012) [pdf, 78 KB]

    ...of appeal to the Residence Review Board. An appeal was lodged. However, due to Ms Yerman’s errors the appeal was lodged out of time and could not proceed. [3] Ms Yerman thought the appeal had been lodged in time, but has had to accept it was filed late. [4] Unfortunately, Ms Yerman’s response has been to attempt to place the blame for her own failings on her client. The complaint has been upheld in a decision issued on 9 May 2012. [5] The Tribunal found Ms Yerman: [5.1] Brea...