Search Results

1. Donnelly v Tuala Rongohaere Marae (2007) 78 Ruatoria MB 55 (78 RUA 55) [pdf, 267 KB]

   ...trust. That is not a situation either the beneficiaries or the Court can countenance. [26] The authorities underscore that trustees are not lightly removed unless there is evidence of abuse, failure or malfeasance and that there are no positive defences. In the Poripori decision when assessing the trustee’s performance the judge found that it was sufficiently wanting to justify removal. That position was supported by the fact that the beneficial owners at general meetings endor...

2. Proposals against incitement of hatred and discrimination Summary of submissions [pdf, 4.7 MB]

   Proposals against incitement of hatred and discrimination Summary of submissions Although all reasonable steps have been taken to ensure the accuracy of the information contained in this document, the Ministry of Justice disclaims any and all responsibility for any inaccuracy, error, omission, or any other kind of inadequacy, deficiency, or flaw in, or in relation to, the information; and fully excludes any and all liability of any kind to any person or entity that chooses to

3. Pouwhare v Auld - Oparau No 1 Block and Pirongia West 12B3D (2015) 95 Waikato Maniapoto MB 167 (95 WMN 167) [pdf, 270 KB]

   ...District Court Rules 2014 – Scale Costs on a 2B Basis Item Activity Time – days Cost (at $1,550.00 per day) 2 Response by respondent (receiving instructions, researching facts and law, and preparing and serving response or statement of defence) 1.0 day $1,550.00 9.12 Preparing written submissions 1.0 day $1,550.00 9.13 Preparing bundle for hearing 0.4 day $620.00 12 Preparation for short trial hearing 0.5 day $775.00 13 Appearance at short trial hearing 1.5...

4. CAC 20003 v Fourie [2014]NZREADT 71 [pdf, 63 KB]

   ...Indeed, because we indicated at the end of the hearing that we found Charge 2 proven and preferred to deal with sentence immediately after the hearing, we refer further below to the financial position of the defendant. [43] Mr Waymouth accepted the statement of relevant legal principles as set out by Ms Earl for the prosecution. Outcome [44] In summary of the relevant facts, the licensee's partner, Philippa Ross, owned the property at 2478 Kopu-Hikuai Road. She defaulted in h...

5. S v J LCRO 5 / 2008 (13 February 2009) [pdf, 39 KB]

   ...(who was dealt with by the Youth Court). The first charge was in respect of certain public toilets at “a park” was the more serious as it involved a “risk to life”. It also appears to be the charge to which Client S’s son had a stronger defence. The second arson, which occurred on the same evening, related to a portaloo and was less serious with no risk to life alleged. It was also the charge to which a weaker defence existed (given the fact that Client S’s son was aware o...

6. [2021] NZEnvC 041 Reid v Bay of Plenty Regional Council [pdf, 678 KB]

   ...unnecessarily lengthen the hearing. (d) where it becomes apparent that a party has failed to explore the possibility of settlement where compromise could have been reasonably expected. (e) where a party takes a technical or unmeritorious point of defence. The applications for costs [12] Harbour Ridge incurred total costs of $44,690.15 (including GST). Harbour Ridge seek an award against Mr Reid of 66 per cent of die costs it incurred in responding the application, totalling $29,...

7. 2020-12-07 Statement of evidence of Tom de Pelsemaeker on behalf of the ORC - Appendix H [pdf, 197 KB]

   MEMORANDUM Date: 12 November 2020 To: Tom de Pelsemaeker From: Philip Maw PRINCIPLES OF THE TREATY OF WAITANGI 1. You have asked us to provide advice setting out the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi, and how the Court has previously applied those principles in a planning context. Executive summary 2. The Resource Management Act (RMA), like a range of contemporary legislation, specifically incorporates the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi (Treaty). Those “prin

8. [2024] NZLCDT 45 Auckland Standards Committee 1 v Jindal (24 December 2024) [pdf, 197 KB]

   ...filed yesterday afternoon. … [17] His Honour went on to record, at paragraph [28]: I am not prepared in any way to find that Mr [] has lied. As a Judge, I am very slow to call anyone a liar. That is, someone who has made a deliberate untruthful statement of fact. An honest witness can be mistaken. I found Mr [Y] in giving evidence did so in a clear and honest manner. He set out in his affidavit and in evidence before me that he had a specific recollection of this telephone call....

9. LCRO 8/2022 QQ v LW (8 October 2024) [pdf, 227 KB]

   ...s 174 proceeding I represent the client in and sought to settle the matter. Note: BP represented the client in a third proceeding (liquidation) CAL referred to in the letter related to the s 174 proceeding. Breach of rule 11.1 – Misleading statements In an interlocutory application the lawyer submitted s 174 was inapplicable. Judge V answered that submission at [48] of his decision dated 21 August 2020 by stating s 174 had broad application. The lawyer stated in his letter (bott...

10. [2021] NZEnvC 027 Director-General of Conservation v Taranaki Regional Council [pdf, 1.8 MB]

    ...ecologists. S tJecified Infimtntctttre .i ., .., [41] We agree with the submissions of counsel that the Project fits within sub-clause (1)(b) of the policy in clause 3.22. We consider it is both a lifeline utility, as defined in the Civil Defence Emergency Management Act 2002, and specified infrastructure providing significant national and regional benefits. There is a functional need for the Project to occur in the identified location, identified after consideration of options i...