Search Results

1. Keenan – The Estate of Patricia June Graham (2015) 45 Takitimu MB 212 (45 TKT 212) [pdf, 267 KB]

   ...rehearing, the court may affirm its former determination, or may vary or annul that determination, and may exercise any jurisdiction that it could have exercised on the original hearing. (6) When a rehearing has been granted, the period allowed for an appeal to the Maori Appellate Court shall not commence to run until the rehearing has been disposed of by a final order of the court. [12] In Henare v Māori Trustee – Parengarenga 3G the Māori Appellate Court discussed the appro...

2. CAC 20006 v Wallace [2013] NZREADT 81 [pdf, 36 KB]

   ...Sime had acted for the property company in bringing about an on-sale of the property for $92,000. [7] The Board held that Mr Sime had placed his objective of achieving sales above his duty to his principal, the original owner of the property. On appeal, the High Court held that this finding nevertheless fell “far short” of establishing the requisite negative character traits to permit orders to be made by the Board. [8] Also relevant is the more recent decision of Davis v The Real...

3. Guidelines: Counsel for subject person - Personal and Property Rights Act [pdf, 94 KB]

   ...available to carry out the tasks (time and geographical availability). (i) Procedures necessary, that is, mediation; orders made on the papers; directions for hearing; hearing. (j) Review date. (k) Whether orders need to be suspended pending an appeal (s 82). (l) Whether fees for counsel for the subject person should be paid out of the estate or out of the Consolidated Fund. 4.6 Be present for service, if considered appropriate. Note that it is not appropriate for counsel to serv...

4. Meek v Ministry of Social Development [2013] NZHRRT 28 [pdf, 53 KB]

   ...grounds listed in s 21 of that Act. The Tribunal has no jurisdiction in relation to complaints that the Ministry failed to properly process or consider an application for financial assistance. That is the function of the Social 2 Security Appeal Authority. Mr Meek did in fact commence a review under the Social Security Act of the decision in issue in this case but that review was subsequently withdrawn on 7 December 2011. In these circumstances there is no need to set out in de...

5. CAC20003 v Santipongchai [2015] NZREADT 11 [pdf, 177 KB]

   ...family financially; also, by such work he could accumulate financial resources for religious missionary work; or whether he should simply leave the real estate industry and move into some other area of employment. [13] In any case, the defendant appeals to this Tribunal for mercy and adds “I know what I did was wrong, I will do my best to make up for it by repaying at the earliest time I can, I will never go and do the wrong again …”. [14] The defendant also seems to be addi...

6. 29 Unit Owners in The Anchorage [2012] NZWHT Auckland 33 [pdf, 100 KB]

   ...as a home, whatever form the home takes. [8] North Shore City Council v Body Corporate 2076242 (Spencer on Byron) considered the issue of whether a duty of care was owed in the context of a mixed use complex. The majority of the Court of Appeal concluded in the circumstances of that case to impose a duty of care in a mixed use complex solely in respect of the residential component would not be fair, just and reasonable. To do this, they noted would be to: Impose different...

7. BORA Corrections Administration (Effectiveness and Efficiency) Bill [pdf, 352 KB]

   ...freedom and an affront to human dignity. [6] Strip searches are inherently degrading and can be considered an affront to the person being searched, particularly when devices or instruments are used to illuminate or magnify areas. The Court of Appeal has said that the “touchstone” of s 21 is the protection of reasonable expectations of privacy. [7] It follows that the greater the degree of intrusiveness, the greater the justification required and, further, the greater need for...

8. Apostolakis v Gilbert (Late Interlocutory Applications) [2017] NZHRRT 54 [pdf, 238 KB]

   ...function of the Tribunal. We can see no possible basis for taking the extraordinary step of removing all or part of these proceedings into the High Court. [15.3] If Mrs Apostolakis is unsuccessful in her claim against Mr Gilbert, she has a right of appeal to the High Court. On such appeal she can raise any question of law which then genuinely arises for determination on the facts as ultimately found by the Tribunal. In the meantime the ordinary statutory process must be allowed to...

9. Cross - Horowhenua 9A6B1 (2016) 355 Aotea MB 199 (355 AOT 199) [pdf, 198 KB]

   ...Act that a transfer of Māori freehold land was unlawful, as it did not conform to the provisions of the Act. They argued that in those circumstances ownership of the land should therefore revert back to the transferor. [21] In dismissing the appeal, the Court referred to the decision of the High Court in Warin v Registrar-General of Land and noted: 14 [69] The Warin decision measures the relationship between the LTA and Māori land legislation, and traverses well-known preced...

10. Canterbury District Law Society v Wood [2009] NZLCDT 11 [pdf, 125 KB]

    ...publication of detail relating to a suspension order is mandatory, so make no further order under s.134 of that Act. [28] We record that this decision is the unanimous decision of all members of this Tribunal. [29] Mr Wood has given notice of appeal against our decision of 21 August 2009 finding him guilty of misconduct in his professional capacity. Accordingly the orders we have made above shall not come into force until 18 October 2009. That will give Mr Wood time to seek appropr...