Search Results

1. Le Lievre v Muriwhenua Incorporation - Muriwhenua Incorporation (2016) 123 Taitokerau MB 240 (123 TTK 240) [pdf, 303 KB]

   123 Taitokerau MB 240 IN THE MĀORI LAND COURT OF NEW ZEALAND TAITOKERAU DISTRICT A20120013565 UNDER Sections 18(1)(a), (b), (c) and (d), 19(1)(a) and (b), 20(d), 22A and 24A Te Ture Whenua Māori Act 1993 IN THE MATTER OF Muriwhenua Incorporation BETWEEN RONDA LE LIEVRE Applicant AND MURIWHENUA INCORPORATION First Respondent AND MARY BRATTON Second Respondent Hearing: 3 July 2013 25 September 2014 19 and 20 Feb

2. OIA-119289.pdf [pdf, 20 MB]

   ...Supreme Court was correct (in Hayes) regarding the statutory purpose of s228 and s229A, ii. whether the statutory purpose of s228 and s229A extends to s240, and iii. whether s240 was intended to apply to contract disputes where deceived and/or misleading statements are made by a legitimate business that result in the obtaining of a pecuniary advantage or valuable consideration (or that causes loss). Noting that the business would be contractually en2tled to the funds obtained through deception....

3. 2021-10-22 ORC PC7 - [2021] NZEnvC 164 - Interim Decision [pdf, 1 MB]

   ...Murihiku Waihōpai Rūnaka, Te Rūnanga Ōraka Aparima and Te Rūnanga o Awarua Ngā Rūnanga Kāi Tahu ki Otago, Ngāi Tahu ki Murihiku and Te Rūnanga o Ngāi Tahu NOF NPS-FM 2020: National Objectives Framework NPS-FM 2020 National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management 2020 NPS-REG 2011 National Policy Statement for Renewable Electricity Generation 2011 NPS-UD 2020 National Policy Statement on Urban Development 2020 Operative regional plan or RWP Regional Plan: Water fo...

4. Zhong v Auckland Council [2011] NZWHT Auckland 32 [pdf, 264 KB]

   Page | 1 IN THE WEATHERTIGHT HOMES TRIBUNAL TRI-2009-100-000105 [2011] NZWHT AUCKLAND 32 BETWEEN HONG ZHONG AND RUN ZHONG Claimants AND AUCKLAND COUNCIL First Respondent AND ROSE MARY MCLAUGHLAN Second Respondent AND YA WEI LI Third Respondent AND STANLEY CHEN Fourth Respondent AND ORIENT BUILDERS LIMITED Fifth Respondent AND LU ZHENG Sixth Respondent AND HBRC LIMITED Seventh Respondent Hearing: 29, 30 and 31 March 2011 Closing

5. [2015] NZEmpC 198 Ritchies Transport Holdings Limited v Merennage [pdf, 297 KB]

   ...any of the meetings that were convened over the entire period at issue other than one meeting during which Mr Amodeo is said to have taken notes, although they are not before the Court. 4 Mr Merennage’s evidence is consistent with the written statement he provided to Mr Harvey dated 8 December 2011. the way the company’s witnesses suggested. It is clear that Mr Merennage was caught off guard at the meeting. He did not have anyone with him, as a support person or...

6. [2016] NZEmpC 23 Banks v Hockey Manawatu Inc [pdf, 235 KB]

   ...allegedly arose over the latter months of his employment. In a determination dated 29 June 2015, the Authority dismissed each of Mr Banks' claims 1 and he was also unsuccessful in an application he had made to the Authority for interim reinstatement. 2 [3] On 24 July 2015, Mr Banks issued proceedings in this Court challenging the Authority's determination and seeking a full hearing de novo of the entire matter. He also seeks reinstatement. HM filed a statement of def...

7. Hettig v ANZ Bank - Kaiawhina Trust and Lot 1 Deposited Plan 158328 (2015) 104 Taitokerau MB 130 (104 TTK 130) [pdf, 176 KB]

   ...provisions of the Property Law Act 2007. Mr Hettig also accepted at the hearing that if the original home loan agreement was provided he may discover that all steps had been taken properly and there was no case against ANZ. Mr Hettig made the statement during the hearing that his application was part of a “fishing exercise” to determine whether ANZ had acted properly. 104 Taitokerau MB 136 [26] Mr Hettig also failed to file submissions on costs by the original deadline of...

8. Berry 21 April 2015 NZSHD 4 [pdf, 58 KB]

   ...A Complaint hearing before the Authority under sections 26 and 27 of the Act is not a criminal trial. [24] Whereas the hearing might have the outward appearance of a criminal prosecution before a District Court Judge, with a Police prosecutor and defence counsel representing the parties, the hearing is governed by the COI Act. The licence holder is not in danger of a criminal conviction being entered, and the issue of costs is specifically addressed in sections 11 and 12 of the COI ACT....

9. [2014] NZEmpC 214 The Selwyn Foundation v Nayathodan [pdf, 83 KB]

   ...that if it were to wait until the Authority’s substantive determination on the merits of the grievances and then include in a challenge allegations that the grievances were raised out of time or were settled, it would be met with an irrefutable defence to that part of the challenge that it was out of time. It says in these circumstances that the Authority’s interim determination on these preliminary issues would not be able to be remedied. [10] The defendant, through counsel, s...

10. Brownlie v Brown - Pipituangi A (2011) 15 Tairawhiti MB 134 (15 TRW 134) [pdf, 126 KB]

    ...Brownlies’ Submissions [12] The Brownlies contended, in response, that their applications should not be classified as „frivolous‟ or „vexatious‟, pointing to the fact that their application for injunction was upheld and reiterating their statements made in previous applications that their pursuit of legal action was a direct response to the behaviour of the trustees. They also note that this is a situation where there is family ownership in a block and ongoing relationshi...