Search Results

1. RR v SU & TT LCRO 189/2013 (29 September 2015) [pdf, 90 KB]

   ...has broad powers to conduct her own investigations, including the power to exercise for that purpose all the powers of a Standards Committee or an investigator, and seek and receive evidence. The statutory power of review is much broader than an appeal, and gives the LCRO discretion as to the approach to be taken on any particular review and the extent of the investigations necessary to conduct that review. Review Issues [26] This Office has, and the Committee had, no jurisdicti...

2. McDonald - Pakiri G (2017) 155 Taitokerau MB 117 (155 TTk 117) [pdf, 163 KB]

   ...do not consider that the making of disclosure carries with it any implication that the very making of the disclosure indicates that the judge’s impartiality is compromised. In that respect I disagree with the view expressed by the Court of Appeal for England and Wales in Taylor v Lawrence. A matter should be disclosed in any case where it is possible that the observer might reasonably think the judge could be biased as a consequence of it. The judge or the court can then consider...

3. BORA Broadcasting (Election Programmes and Election Advertising) Amendment Bill [pdf, 164 KB]

   ...but, as the explanatory note to the Bill explains, it “enables political parties to communicate with voters through digital media more flexibly and cost-effectively, while maintaining existing safeguards and restrictions.” 19. The Court of Appeal observed in Alliance Party v Electoral Commission & Ors the existing regime “significantly constrains the ability of political parties to communicate their messages directly to voters…there is a distinct constraint upon activities...

4. [2018] NZEmpC 3 Kazemi v Rightway Ltd [pdf, 221 KB]

   ...Employees Union Inc [2015] NZEmpC 44, (2015) 12 NZELR 452 at [158]. 7 Baguley v Coutts Cars Ltd [2000] 2 ERNZ 409 (EmpC) at [64]. Note that this was reversed in part by Coutts Cars v Baguley [2001] ERNZ 660, [2002] 2 NZLR 533 (CA), but the Court of Appeal (at [16]) heard no argument on this point. 8 Masina v Commissioner, Te Kura Kaupapa Maori O Piripino Te Kura Whakahou O Otara [2010] NZEmpC 141, [2010] ERNZ 413 at [36] and [66]. 9 New Zealand Amalgamated Engineering, Printing...

5. TR Environmental Law Conference Judge Newhook Paper [pdf, 156 KB]

   ...mediation is invariably much less expensive than a court hearing with its attendant witness expenses, legal costs and risk of an award of costs by the Court. [19] Mediation is used to resolve all three main types of the civil jurisdiction of the Court, appeals about plan making, appeals about consenting, and enforcement. In New Zealand, the Environment Court does not hear prosecutions for breaches of the Resource Management Act and plans. Those are heard in the District Court, by Ju...

6. Russell v Burns - Ōnuku 886 2B2 Ahu Whenua Trust (2018) 39 Te Waipounamu MB 34 (39 TWP 34) [pdf, 294 KB]

   ...non-compliance with a rule, the Court may at any time in a proceeding— (a) set aside the proceeding for non-compliance; or (b) make any other appropriate order for addressing the non-compliance. (5) Nothing in this rule prevents an application or an appeal to a court of competent jurisdiction or an application to the Chief Judge under section 45 of the Act challenging the validity of an order of the Court on the ground of non-compliance with these rules. [29] The Court can exc...

7. CAC 414 v Goyal [2018] NZREADT 3 [pdf, 191 KB]

   ...must be paid to the Authority within 20 working days of the date of this decision. [40] Pursuant to s 113 of the Real Estate Agents Act 2008, the Tribunal draws the parties’ attention to s 116 of the Real Estate Agents Act 2008, which sets out appeal rights. Any appeal must be filed in the High Court within 20 working days of the date on which the Tribunal’s decision is served. The procedure to be followed is set out in part 20 of the High Court Rules. ____________...

8. [2015] NZEmpC 37 Gapuzan v Pratt Whitney Air NZ [pdf, 157 KB]

   ...the earlier decision of Richardson v Board of Governors of Wellesley College, Judge Travis had provided a useful analysis of the range of costs awards previously made by the Court, which were $3,800 to $6,400 per hearing day. 4 The Court of Appeal referred to that analysis with apparent approval in Transmissions & Diesels Limited v Matheson. 5 Counsel submitted that a proper award of costs in this matter would be $6,400 inclusive of GST. [4] Subsequently I issued a...

9. [2017] NZEnvC 178 Lau v Auckland Council [pdf, 4.4 MB]

   ...In the context of the RMA it is also relevant that there is no presumption that costs would follow the event, and that under the RMA litigation carries a high element of public interest and provides for public participation in the submissions and appeal process. 1 [16] In Fonterra Co-Operative Group Limited & Anor v Manawatu-Wanganui See [3]-[4], [9]-[16] and [19], Mahanga E Tu Incorporated v Hawkes Bay Regional Council [2011] NZEnvC 21 , (2011) 16 ELRNZ 332. [2013] NZEnvC 32....

10. BORA Manukau City Council (Control of Street Prostitution) Bill [pdf, 417 KB]

    ...the content or form of the expression. 8. New Zealand and international jurisprudence supports the proposition that forms of expression that may be regarded as offensive or distasteful are nevertheless protected forms of expression. The Court of Appeal in Living Word Film Distributors v Human Rights Action Group[5] accepted the proposition that a fundamental aspect of the right to freedom of expression is that it extends to protecting all information and opinion, however offensive or dis...