Search Results

1. Trustees of Te Ngae Farm Trust v Trustees of Ngāti Rangiteaorere Koromatua Council - Te Ngae Farm Trust (2015) 133 Waiariki MB 58 (133 WAR 58) [pdf, 303 KB]

   ...184). These are authorities for the following principles: 2 Nicholls v Trustees of W T Nicholls Whānau Trust – Part Papaaroha 6B Block [2014] Māori Appellate Court MB 2 (2014 APPEAL 2). 133 Waiariki MB 62 a) The Court has an absolute and unlimited discretion as to costs; b) Costs normally follow the event; c) A successful party should be awarded a reasonable contribution to the costs that were act...

2. Baker v Baker - Tarawera 5A (2012) 18 Takitimu MB 262 (18 TKT 262) [pdf, 137 KB]

   ...6 Te Ture Whenua Māori Act, s 17(2)(a). 18 Tākitimu MB 272 Jurisdiction under s 18(1)(i) [17] The issue of what jurisdiction is granted by s 18(1)(i) was discussed by the Court of Appeal in Attorney-General v Māori Land Court [1999] 1 NZLR 689. This case involved General and Crown land, and the ability of the Māori Land Court to make vesting orders in relation to such land. The Court of Appeal stated that:7 There is

3. Taniora – Te Koutu Mourea Maori Reservation (2014) 91 Waiariki MB 173 (91 WAR 173) [pdf, 148 KB]

   ...the 1984 gazettal was based was made without knowledge of the s 440/53 order and was therefore flawed. He recommended that the reservation be partly cancelled and an area of 1 acre be excised from the Māori reservation. 4 [9] That decision was appealed by Erana Waiomio. The Māori Appellate Court overturned the decision of Judge Savage. It explained that the purpose of s 440 of the Māori Affairs Act 1953 was to enable the vesting of an interest in Māori land in a person to en...

4. Horan – Hiwarau C (2013) 70 Waiariki 61 (70 WAR 61) [pdf, 159 KB]

   ...is a sufficient degree of support for the application among the owners, having regard to the nature and importance of the matter. This issue is problematic. [35] In 2011, the Māori Appellate Court considered the approach to this issue.8 The appeal involved two blocks of land, Tutuotekaha 1B5B1 and Tutuotekaha 1B5B2. During the 1940’s to the 1950’s, the appellant’s father cleared and used the land. Without development finance, however, he was forced to leave and the land wa...

5. Mansfield v Pomana - Matawihi 1A & 2 Blocks (2013) 24 Takitimu MB 287 (24 TKT 287) [pdf, 164 KB]

   ...paragraphs [6] to [13] for that information. The Law [8] It is trite law that trustees must adhere to their duties and any claim as to a lack of knowledge of such responsibilities is no defence against a claim of breach of duty. The Court of Appeal in a recent judgment Rameka v Hall underscored the relevant duties including the principal obligation of being familiar with the terms of the trust:2 [28] The general responsibilities of responsible trustees are set out in s 223 of th...

6. Wellington Standards Committee v Hall [2012] NZLCDT 7 [pdf, 117 KB]

   ...is of course not a criminal case, the Tribunal considers it is an application to strike out a case on the basis that it discloses no reasonably arguable cause of action. The principles to be applied in such a case are summarised by the Court of Appeal in Attorney-General v Prince & Gardner1 and endorsed by the Supreme Court in Couch v Attorney-General.2 Significantly an application to strike on this basis must proceed only in those cases where the

7. [2015] NZEmpC 105 Scarborough v Micron Security Products Limited costs [pdf, 233 KB]

   ...together, and give rise to a number of difficulties in practice as the cases reveal. [35] I pause to note that the approach to costs adopted in this Court can be contrasted with the one that applies in the United Kingdom. There the Employment Appeal Tribunal Rules 1993 provide for a costs-free starting point, reflecting a recognition of the desirability of encouraging access to the Appeal Authority (the EAT) for public policy reasons. The presumption that each party will bear thei...

8. Brebner & Anor v Collie & Anor [2013] NZWHT Auckland 23 [pdf, 113 KB]

   ...sale and purchase. Following a hearing I issued a determination finding that although the house had weathertightness defects and required significant repair, Ms Collie was not liable to the claimants in tort or in contract. [2] The claimants appealed to the High Court. Justice Peters upheld all the factual findings made by the Tribunal and the finding regarding the claim in tort. She also upheld a finding that had the claim in tort been established, the degree of contributor...

9. LCRO 159/2017 YB v WD [pdf, 147 KB]

   ...scope of review [25] The nature and scope of a review have been discussed by the High Court, which said of the process of review under the Act:3 … 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 p...

10. LCRO 196/2016 GY v SO (15 September 2017) [pdf, 194 KB]

    ...scope of review [24] The nature and scope of a review have been discussed by the High Court, which said of the process of review under the Act:22 … 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...