Search Results

1. The Proprietors of Maraeroa C v NZ Forest Products Ltd (2007) 121 Waikato MB 258 (121 W 258) [pdf, 4.1 MB]

   ...trees growing on their lands." [19] In paragraph 40 the orders are said to be in reliance on sections 18(1)(a), 18(1)(d) and 18(1)(i) of the Act. The Arguments [20] The Court was aided by thorough submissions from counsel and by several affidavits filed on behalf of the parties. The respondents' challenges to the jurisdiction of the Court are pitched at two levels. [21] First, it is argued that the Court does not have jurisdiction to hear the claims as they do not fall...

2. Milne v Lodge [2010] NZWHT Wellington 3 [pdf, 221 KB]

   ...builder. He is in the same position as Mr de Groot in the case under discussion. [72] However, as Tipping J points out in Chase v de Groot, there was another relationship in this case, that of parties to a contract. [73] Mrs Milne, in an affidavit of 21 August 2009, says:- 4. … We, of course, were not around throughout the building of the house but we were made aware of the construction process through our dealings with the First Respondents and their real estate age...

3. [2020] NZEmpC 167 Noble v Ballooning Canterbury.com Ltd [pdf, 287 KB]

   ...[11] The essence of BCL’s position is that indemnity costs should be awarded for several reasons. The first of these was that BCL had requested that the jurisdictional matter be dealt with on an interlocutory basis, with the filing of affidavits and submissions. Mr Noble had opposed this course of action, preferring it to be dealt with at the substantive hearing which he would travel to New Zealand to attend. As already noted, the Authority then ruled it would deal with j...

4. Joint Application to Make a New Parenting Order by Consent [pdf, 603 KB]

   ...Swearing or Affirming Check the box to confirm the following statements: I/we confirm that I/we have made reasonable enquiries to establish that relevant facts and circumstances have been disclosed. To the best of my/our knowledge and belief, my/our affidavit discloses all such facts and circumstances. Applicant 1 I, (your full name) of (the town where you live) Occupation Swear Or affirm Date D D M M Y Y Y Y Signed Applicant 2 I, (your full name) of (the town whe...

5. [2018] NZEmpC 13 Lyttelton Port Co Ltd v Rail and Maritime Union of NZ Inc [pdf, 327 KB]

   ...precise factual evidence to satisfy the court that he or she has a real prospect of succeeding in his claim for a permanent injunction at the trial”.6 [20] On previous occasions, the Court has stated that it normally prefers the plaintiff’s affidavit evidence and assumes that this is the position which is likely to be established at trial. However, a nuanced approach is required. So, in Golden Bay Cement, Judge Travis stated in respect of an application for interim injuncti...

6. Wellington Standards Committee 2 v O'Connor [2023] NZLCDT 18 (8 May 2023) [pdf, 177 KB]

   ...they first met. A Parole Board report on Mr Coles dated 22 June 20171 recorded Mr O’Connor as having “stated he first met Mr Coles a few years ago when acting as counsel for him…”. Mr O’Connor never commented on that document in his affidavit. In submissions to the Standards Committee2, Mr O’Connor advanced a different version: that, “when I entered practice, … I already considered Mr Coles a friend.” Mr O’Connor described the relationship as one of friendshi...

7. KU & UE v TQ Ltd [2021] NZDT 1649 (28 October 2021) [pdf, 292 KB]

   ...filing fee for an appeal. You can only appeal outside of 20 working days if you have been granted an extension of time by a District Court Judge. To apply for an extension of time you must file an Interlocutory Application on Notice and a supporting affidavit, then serve it on the other parties. There is a fee for this application. District Court proceedings are more complex than Disputes Tribunal proceedings, and you may wish to seek legal advice. The District Court may, on determinat...

8. Hastie and Dredge TRI-2023-100-001 Procedural Order 4 [pdf, 154 KB]

   ...services agreement. Submissions opposing removal [38] The claimants accept that the delay in bringing this proceeding has been inordinate. However, the claimants submit that the delay is excusable due to the events referred to in Mr Hastie’s affidavit having had a significant impact on the claimants. Those events include, among others: (a) the local authority failing the final inspection for the remedial works; (b) the Canterbury earthquakes causing further damage to the p...

9. [2023] NZEmpC 75 Te Whatu Ora Health New Zealand v New Zealand Nurses Organisation Inc [pdf, 266 KB]

   ...2023, between 1.30 pm and 2.30 pm. [2] The application for urgency was granted and the Court heard argument yesterday. Preliminary issues [3] There were two preliminary issues. The first was that the plaintiff filed two further affidavits purportedly in reply to evidence from the defendant and an issue arose about whether they were to be read. In the end potential difficulties over them and their ambit were resolved by Mx Hornsby-Geluk accepting that they should be...

10. Wellington Standards Committee v CLS [2014] NZLCDT 80 [pdf, 412 KB]

    ...business and to market it for sale. As to issue two – the continued running of OTW [20] The practitioner was criticised for continuing to run OTW past the point where it should have been clear a sale was not likely to occur. [21] T swore an affidavit in support of her complaints against the practitioner. There is implied criticism by her that the practitioner had persuaded her that the right course of action was to keep the business running as it was attractive to prospective p...