Search Results

1. Re Dunstan (Rejection of Statements of Claim No. 4) [2024] NZHRRT 67 [pdf, 159 KB]

   ...Dunstan was invited to provide submissions or additional information addressing those concerns. A copy of that Minute is attached for ease of reference. [7] In response, on 26 April 2024, Ms Dunstan filed a seven page document entitled “Formal Appeal of the Plaintiff, Tanya Dunstan Regarding Decisions Issued 9 April 2024, Filed 26 April 2024”.5 The accompanying email confirmed this document was her response to the Minute. [8] Ms Dunstan’s submission was primarily focused on...

2. [2025] NZEmpC 170 Saphoo v Yunan [pdf, 182 KB]

   ...so, what amount? [16] A breach of a compliance order is a serious matter. Mr Yunan has not provided any explanation or excuse as to why payment has not been made in accordance with the orders made by the Authority. [17] The Court of Appeal in Peter Reynolds Mechanical Ltd v Denyer identified the primary purpose of s 140(6) is to secure compliance. Further, it found that the section must be intended to enable the Court to impose some form of sanction for non- compliance...

3. [2025] NZEmpC 213 Carr v Hamilton Civil Plant Ltd (Oral judgment of Judge Beck, 18 September 2025) [pdf, 208 KB]

   ...months: (d) order that the person in default be fined a sum not exceeding $40,000: (e) order that the property of the person in default be sequestered. [7] In Peter Reynolds Mechanical Ltd v Denyer (Labour Inspector),2 the Court of Appeal referred to a range of factors to consider in assessing sanctions under s 140(6). [8] The factors referred to by the Court of Appeal are not exhaustive but include the nature of the default (whether it is deliberate or wilful), whet...

4. Waikato Bay of Plenty Standards Committee v Bean [2016] NZLCDT 7 [pdf, 34 KB]

   ...is even higher. [32] For all of the above reasons we refuse the final suppression order other than in the terms already stated. However, we indicated to counsel that the interim suppression order would remain in force for the duration of the appeal period. Summary of Orders 1. A censure is imposed upon the practitioner under terms set out in para [18] of this decision. 2. The practitioner is suspended for a period from the date of hearing until 17 July 2018, that is equival...

5. LCRO 181/2023 HC v QG and VO (28 February 2025) [pdf, 413 KB]

   ...in respect of the first particular of alleged conduct the respondents relied on in giving notice of expulsion2 and ruled in favour of the respondents on the second.3 The outcome was an award affirming the validity of the expulsion. Neither party appealed the award for error of law. [7] The parties had various business entities comprising their overall business relationship as a legal practice. These were: (a) the firm itself, being an ordinary partnership of the three parties; (b)...

6. Deputy Registrar v Graham - Parehuia June Durie Kaitiaki Trust (2015) 334 Aotea MB 201 (334 AOT 201) [pdf, 282 KB]

   ...to go to anyone other than the two individuals he considered were his legitimate offspring. [16] The Court, in accordance with the terms of the will, subsequently issued succession orders. I am not aware of any applications for rehearing or appeal or of any proceedings brought to challenge the will of Tino Tangata Charles Durie. So his intentions were fulfilled and his daughter Parehuia Durie and his son Noa Durie were the sole and unchallenged successors to his land. Noa Duri...

7. Mane - Waihou A8C1B1 (2015) 117 Taitokerau MB 215 (117 TTK 215) [pdf, 293 KB]

   ...of intention to create a trust; certainty of subject matter (that is, the property subject to the trust and the extent of the beneficial interest of each beneficiary); and certainty of objects. These requirements were summarised by the Court of Appeal in Foreman v Hazard as follows: 26 Property may be impressed with an express trust in one of two ways: either by a declaration of trust which involves a change in equitable ownership but not in legal title, or by a transfer of prope...

8. BORA Foreshore and Seabed Bill [pdf, 125 KB]

   ...prima facie infringement is "demonstrably justifiable in a free and democratic society". I conclude that it is. Background to the Bill 3. The Bill is the Government's response to the substantial uncertainties created by the Court of Appeal's decision in Ngati Apa v Attorney General [2003] 3 NZLR 643 (CA). In that case the Court of Appeal held that: 3.1 No legislation could be said to have definitively extinguished a claim that particular iwi might have at common l...

9. Mane-Waihou A8C1B1 (2018) 169 Taitokerau MB 108 (169 TTK 108) [pdf, 602 KB]

   ...of intention to create a trust; certainty of subject matter (that is, the property subject to the trust and the extent of the beneficial interest of each beneficiary); and certainty of objects. These requirements were summarised by the Court of Appeal in Foreman v Hazard as follows:26 Property may be impressed with an express trust in one of two ways: either by a declaration of trust which involves a change in equitable ownership but not in legal title, or by a transfer of property...

10. LCRO 121/2017 PT v BD (25 July 2018) [pdf, 266 KB]

    ...scope of review [33] The nature and scope of a review have been discussed by the High Court, which said of the process of review under the Act:9 … the power of review conferred upon Review Officers is not appropriately equated with a general appeal. The obligations and powers of the Review Officer as described in the Act create a very particular statutory process. The Review Officer has broad powers to conduct his or her own investigations including the power to exercise for that...