Search Results

1. Walker v Sinclair - Lot 9 DP 44307 (2013) 62 Taitokerau MB 203 (62 TTK 203) [pdf, 125 KB]

   ...RESERVED JUDGMENT OF JUDGE L R HARVEY Introduction [1] Ngaio Walker seeks a determination of the status of the land known as Lot 9 DP 44307 per ss 18(h) and 18(i) of Te Ture Whenua Māori Act 1993 (“the Act”). The applicant has also filed an application for special aid per s 98 of the Act. [2] The application was heard by me on 19 July 2012 at Whangarei. At the time I indicated that I was simply present to take evidence and that the matter would be referred back to Judge...

2. Vucich & Anor v CAC306 & Ors [2015] NZREADT 54 [pdf, 172 KB]

   ...which we dismissed the vendors’ appeal against the penalty imposed on the licensees by Complaints Assessment Committee 306 on 1 October 2014 for unsatisfactory conduct. 2 [2] On 22 May 2015 counsel for the second respondent licensees filed an application to recall our decision on the basis that we had not addressed the licensees’ position i.e. their cross-appeal on penalty; and, given our reasoning in paragraphs [40] to [42] of our said decision of 22 May 2015 on penalty, t...

3. CAC20004 v Li & Ors [2015] NZREADT 64 [pdf, 132 KB]

   ...that the complainants have suffered loss which could be compensated for under s 110(g) of the Real Estate Agents Act 2008. We observe that may only apply where we have a situation of misconduct. Accordingly, he sought leave to obtain access to the files of this Registry regarding this matter and a timetable to file submissions on penalty. [22] Mr Rea filed a further memo on 25 August 2015 pointing out that we are functus officio with regard to our final determinations already made in r...

4. Murray - Mahinepua B1 (2014) 87 Taitokerau MB 227 (87 TTK 227) [pdf, 106 KB]

   ...87 Taitokerau MB 229 Background to the Māori reservation [6] I have already set out the terms of the Gazette Notice above. [7] In the course of hearing the applications I directed the Registrar to retrieve the original application file that gave rise to the Gazette Notice. As noted, the application was brought in 1966 by Auwha Ihaia, a grandson of Wiremu Ihaia. The original application could not be located in the file. The minute of the hearing on 16 October 1967 reads...

5. Davis - Ahipara A8B (2014) 88 Taitokerau MB 186 (88 TTK 186) [pdf, 152 KB]

   ...occupation order is concerned, the only issue requiring my attention is the size of the occupation site. Background [2] A8B is 21.57 hectares in area and presently has approximately 30 owners holding 548.157 shares. At the time the application was filed Catherine held 5.55 shares. As a result of further successions and her sister gifting her further shares she now holds 17.723 shares. 1 A8B is situated on Roma Road, Ahipara. It has some areas of pasture but has largely revert...

6. The Trustees of Oweta 4B v Riki - Oweta 4B (2012) 21 Tairawhiti MB 190 (21 TRW 190) [pdf, 166 KB]

   ...proposed trustees who were appointed by the Court were Parekura Tureia Riki, Tutu Riki and the late Tuakana Tokotoru Riki. 3 The third trustee, Tuakana Tokotoru Riki, the respondent’s father, died before the application concerning this Court was filed. [4] Later in 2004, the balance of the block not occupied by the respondent, was leased to Wayne Hall. That lease will expire in 2016. There has been no pay out to individual shareholders as yet and as at 1 December 2011, there was...

7. Matchitt - Te Kaha 65 (2012) 65 Waiariki MB 120 (65 WAR 120) [pdf, 125 KB]

   ...Harata Matchitt. They received their shareholding on 1 November 1979 1 . Although it has been suggested through prior Court hearings, there is currently no ahu whenua trust over this block. [2] The Court has before it an application made under s 289 filed by Edward Matchitt on 14 October 2011. The applicant has 1/7 th share in Te Kaha 65. The application is for a hapu partition. In support of the application, the following documents were filed: Schedule of particulars for the...

8. Auckland Standards Committee v Hong [2014] NZLCDT 41 [pdf, 110 KB]

   ...oral decision finding the practitioner guilty of misconduct pursuant to s 71A(i) and (ii). This decision relates to the penalty to be imposed as a consequence of that finding. Submissions for the Standards Committee [2] Penalty submissions were filed on 10 April 2014, well in advance of the penalty hearing. Thus the practitioner was on notice from that time that the Standards Committee sought an order suspending him from practice for 12 months. The basis of that submission was...

9. Bedford v Luton LCRO 72 / 2009 (29 June 2009) - Penalty and Costs [pdf, 26 KB]

   ...had previously be held solely in Mr H’s name would be transferred into the name of Ms H. In this regard Ms Luton provided a solicitor’s undertaking by which she undertook that she would: 2 forthwith following settlement complete and file the Share transfers for all [H] companies. [4] Settlement occurred on 28 November 2008. On 21 January 2009 Mr Bedford became aware that no company transfers had been registered and brought this to the attention of Ms Luton. In doing so...

10. Q v I LCRO 41 / 2009 (2 June 2009) [pdf, 22 KB]

    ...write to Mr Q or Complainant Q to forewarn of the intention to serve a statutory demand was not a breach of professional standards. The position is significantly different from the service of legal proceedings. In that case the proceedings are filed in court and require a timely response must be similarly filed. For this reason they should not be filed without first some indication of that intention. A statutory demand is no more than a demand in a statutorily prescribed form which ca...