18483 items matching your search terms
CLAIM FILE NO: 00036 UNDER The Weathertight Homes Resolution Services Act 2002 IN THE MATTER OF an adjudication BETWEEN FRANCO GODINICH and SUSAN MARIE GODINICH Claimants AND GUAN THYE HENG CO LTD First Respondent AND APPROVED BUILDING CERTIFIERS LTD Second Respondent DETERMINATION OF ADJUDICATOR (Dated 6 October 2003) 1. BACKGROUND 1.1 The Claimants lodged a claim under the Weathertight Homes Reso...
...should have been made under s 121(2)(b) of the Accident Compensation Act 1972. Counsel were given the opportunity after the hearing to make further submissions in relation to s 121(2)(b), 2 but elected to rely on the submissions already filed in respect of s 80. The only significant difference is that the requirement under s 80(2)(b) is that the expense or loss claimed must be “identifiable and reasonable”, as opposed to “identifiable actual and reasonable” under s 121...
...adviser. It is not evident how Mr Standing could lawfully perform his professional engagement with Ms McLaren. [23] The liquidator instructed Ms Cottrell, a lawyer experienced in providing immigration advice. She evaluated Ms and Mr McLaren’s file, and reported. This report concluded: [23.1] An expression of interest had been lodged. [23.2] It was “on the border” of having enough points to qualify for selection. [23.3] Even if selected, it was not likely that a residence visa...
...Mr Sparks’ affidavit – earlier statements [52] Mr Sparks commented on his statements made to the Authority’s investigator. [53] He said the first telephone call was on 25 January 2011, and it was unexpected. He had not had time to check his file and answered as best he could. Further, he challenges the accuracy of the record in relation to meeting Mr OBC. Mr Sparks believes he said he could have met him, and he certainly did not intend to mislead the Authority. [54] His estimate...
...b) That the Court took into account an irrelevant consideration; c) That the Court failed to take account of a relevant consideration; d) That the decision is plainly wrong. 2 Sufficient Support for the Application [13] The notice of appeal filed by the appellant simply stated that the learned Judge erred in determining that there was insufficient support for the application. [14] Counsel for the appellant argued that only two persons spoke against the application during the cour...
...breach of the trust order. Prior to the new trust order (issued on 16 May 2007) trustees were only able to be paid expenses incurred by them and not a fee for attending meetings: clause 17. In my judgment of 5 April 2007, I directed the trustees to file a report setting out the meeting fees paid to each trustee (separately identifying the amounts relating to trustee meetings, pmtfolio meetings and other) for each of the financial years 200 I to 2006, At the hearing on 16 May 2007, M...
...Conclusion [56] Both the plaintiff’s challenge, and the removed claim, are dismissed. Costs [57] Costs are reserved at the request of the parties. If they cannot otherwise be agreed I will receive memoranda, with the defendant filing and serving any application and supporting material within 20 working days of the date of this judgment and the plaintiff filing and serving any response, together with any supporting material, within a further 10 working days. Anythin...
...D. 0: The conditions of consent for a four-lot , two-building platform are to be amended as stated in the Reasons and must include an amalgamation condition that Lot 3 is held in one title with either Lot 1 or Lot 2. [2] The parties have now filed a joint memorandum dated 20 December 2018. The applicant has elected to pursue its Option "A" meaning the alternative orders are no longer relevant. Conditions [3] The parties have filed updated conditions that incorporate am...
...appeal against the abatement notice is refused and the abatement notice is confirmed. B. Costs are reserved with directions made as to any application for costs. 2 REASONS Introduction [1] Double R Developments Limited (the Appellant)1 has filed an appeal against an abatement notice issued to it by the Western Bay of Plenty District Council (the Council) requiring it to comply with a condition of its resource consent relating to a subdivision of a site at Hanlen Avenue, Waih...
...have passed away. Pihema’s interests have been vested in the Pihema Whanau Trust. [12] In 2009, Mr Hohepa returned to discover that his father’s house had been demolished and a new house had been erected on C30A. On 29 March 2011, Mr Hohepa filed an application with the Court per s 24 of Te Ture Whenua Māori Act 1993 (“the Act”).5 The application came before Judge Ambler on 14 March 2012. He appointed a surveyor to prepare a plan to show whether Pihema’s house was loc...