Search Results

1. [2021] NZEnvC 190 Wolf 2008 Limited v Whangarei District Council [pdf, 347 KB]

   ..._________________________________________________________________ A: The Applicant’s declaration is allowed. Declarations could be issued broadly in 2 the terms outlined below: (a) an application for extension of a lapse date under s125(1A)(b) must be filed prior to the lapse date. Failure to do so is fatal to any jurisdiction under the Act; (b) where such an application is made, the processing of that application, any objections and appeals are matters that are de...

2. [2023] NZIACDT 13 - OT v Ramos (24 April 2023) [pdf, 174 KB]

   ...denoted more than a temporary inability to provide services competently. It was not appropriate to frame the absence of arrangements to hand files to another licensed adviser as a separate breach of cl 1. Rather, there was one breach, namely not filing the application in time. [29] Equally, according to counsel, there was no basis to the allegation that Ms Ramos failed to be honest by not advising the complainant she was unwell. The reason the application was not filed was that...

3. Hutcheson v Clarkson - Mangamaire B2 Trust (2019) 81 Takitimu MB 52 (81 TKT 52) [pdf, 252 KB]

   ...that the application for removal should be struck out. The trustees need to answer questions concerning their activities and the annual accounts. For example, clause 7 (c) (i) of the current trust order requires that the accounts be audited and filed with the Registrar within six months of the balance date if the trust’s income exceeds 4 Refer 60 Tākitimu MB 223 (60 TKT 223) 81 Takitimu MB 56 $10,000. The only excepti...

4. LCRO 191/2020 QC on behalf of ABC Limited v VH (8 April 2022) [pdf, 185 KB]

   ...consult. [21] Mr GY provided a brief response on 20 August 2020. That response did not reference any information from the lawyer that Mr GY had intended to consult. His submission essentially reinforced argument advanced when the complaint was filed, that [Law firm]’s apportionment of tasks amongst a multitude of authors had likely contributed to inefficiencies and an escalation in costs. [22] The Standards Committee delivered its decision on 15 September 2020. [23] The Commit...

5. [2013] NZEmpC 29 Brightwater Engineers Ltd v Arrowsmith [pdf, 121 KB]

   ...s 179(2) to this case, the last day on which the applicant could commence a challenge as of right was 14 January 2013, being the 28 th day after 17 December 2012. [5] On 18 January 2013, Mr Butler sent a statement of claim to the Court for filing. It was rejected as being out of time. On 25 January 2013, Mr Butler filed an application to extend the time for filing a statement of claim together with two affidavits in support. That application is opposed by the respondents. On t...

6. Canterbury Westland Standards Committee v Tee [2013] NZLCDT 12 [pdf, 50 KB]

   ...3 payment were inadequate, with the location and application of the funds unclear. The part of the payment said to be a gift was alleged to have been made without Ms G obtaining independent advice. Mr Tee’s position [5] Mr Tee filed a pro forma response to the charges under r 7 Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Disciplinary Tribunal) Regulations 2008. In that response he denied all of the charges. [6] In respect of the first charge he acknowledged in his response th...

7. Shropshire v March LCRO 64 / 2010 (28 October 2010) [pdf, 100 KB]

   ...of them took any steps to inform the other of the actions being taken. Out of this background the Applicant filed complaints against the Practitioner. 3 Complaints [6] Underlying the complaints was the Applicant‟s view that the filing of proceedings had been unnecessary, and could have been avoided if the Practitioner had made prior contact with him (or his lawyer), and/or taken steps to ascertain the accuracy of the CSA assessment, either with the CSA or by contacti...

8. SW v UH LCRO 170/2014 (5 February 2016) [pdf, 48 KB]

   ...The subject of the proceedings was Ms VM’s grandchildren. The children had been in Ms VM’s care. The proceedings were initiated by the children’s grandfather, who was seeking day-to-day care of the children. At the time the proceedings were filed, the children’s grandfather was residing with Mr SW. [3] The Court made timetabling directions. Ms UH prepared an affidavit to be filed in Court by her client, Ms VM. LCRO 170/2014 CONCERNING an application for review pursu...

9. [2019] NZEnvC 008 Schmuck v Northland Regional Council [pdf, 4.5 MB]

   ...enable the advancement of the case in an orderly and pragmatic way. C. Costs are reserved for the substantive hearing. Directions [1] Directions are made for the exchange of evidence as follows: (a) that the evidence of the applicant is to be filed by 5.00pm, Wednesday 13 March 2019; (b) the reply evidence for the Society and the Regional Council, if any, is to be filed by 500pm, Wednesday 27 March 2019; (c) reply evidence for the applicant is to be filed by 5.00pm, Wednesday...

10. Harihona v Heta - Te Pupuke C1B1 [2025] Māori Appellate Court MB 167 (2025 APPEAL 167) [pdf, 251 KB]

    ...kōrero Introduction [1] On 28 March 2019 Her Honour Judge Wara granted a permanent injunction requiring William Tiki Rudolph and Huarangi Harihona (the Appellants) to vacate Te Pupuke C1B, C1B1, and C1B2.1 [2] On 25 October 2024 the Appellants filed a notice of appeal and an application for leave to appeal out of time. [3] Both applications were set down to be heard in Whangarei on 13 February 2025. [4] At the 13 February 2025 hearing the Court heard the parties on the issue o...