Search Results

1. Kerehi v Griggs - Ngapuketaurua 6C Section 1 (2017) 62 Tākitimu MB 210 (62 TKT 210) [pdf, 424 KB]

   ...[12] I am satisfied that the owners have had sufficient notice of the proposal and sufficient opportunity to consider it. 2 Whaanga v Niania – Anewa Block [2011] Māori Appellate Court MB 428 (2011 APPEAL 428) at [38]. 3 49 Takitimu MB 151 – 175 62 Tākitimu MB 213 Support? [13] Mr Bloor advised that as at 19 February 2016 he had responses from 18 of the 39 owners. 11 were in support of the proposal and 7 were against (...

2. LS v MIS [2021] CEIT-2020-0024 [pdf, 365 KB]

   ...https://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2019/0021/latest/whole.html#LMS35785 funding, without which cases with merit could never be pursued. Litigation funding is champertous, as the funder has no interest in the litigation, beyond profit. This development led the Court of Appeal in Saunders v Houghton to state10: We have concluded that, like the common law of Australia and that of Canada, the common law of New Zealand should refrain from condemning as tortious or otherwise un...

3. Auckland Standards Committee 5 v Hong [2020] NZLCDT 12 [pdf, 160 KB]

   ...conduct by Standards Committees or the Legal Complaints Review Officer (LCRO) under the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006. (c) Two findings of misconduct under the 2006 Act by the Tribunal, both of which have been confirmed by the High Court on appeal. [16] Mr Hong has been subject to the following penalties: (a) Censure (twice). (b) Fines of $500, $1,500, $1,000 and $7,500 (twice). (c) Orders to take advice on his practice (twice). (d) An order to rectify an error. (e) An o...

4. Reedy v Atkins - Waitangi A1 A1 (2019) 76 Tākitimu MB 54 (76 TKT 54) [pdf, 362 KB]

   ...arguments. He then exercised his discretion in favour of Mr Ashby. We do not detect any error in the judge’s approach when disposing of these applications. Consequently, we see no reason why the lower Court decision should be disturbed. The appeal must be dismissed. [15] For completeness, we note that the Appellant has made a number of submissions on what might be termed constitutional issues. While her interpretation of the various cases cited was patently incorrect, we do...

5. Pai - Waihi Kahakaharoa 3B2A and Waihi Kahakaharoa 9A (2019) 407 Aotea MB 180 (407 AOT 180) [pdf, 107 KB]

   ...trustee has failed to carry out the duties of a trustee satisfactorily; or (b) because of lack of competence or prolonged absence, the trustee is or will be incapable of carrying out those duties satisfactorily. [24] In Rameka v Hall the Court of Appeal held that, in applying section 240, the Māori Land Court must carry out a two-stage test: first, it must ask if the relevant trustee has breached his or her responsibilities as a trustee; and second, if it finds that the trustee has...

6. [2019] NZEmpC 75 Horizon Concepts Ltd v Hayward [pdf, 435 KB]

   ...arrangements they have entered into, that the relationship is a different one after it ended.8 [28] The intention of the parties points against a conclusion that the real nature of the relationship was employment. Control test [29] The Court of Appeal described the control test in Challenge Realty Ltd v Commissioner of Inland Revenue.9 The concept is the right of control over the putative employee which is generally recognised as a necessary and important condition of a contr...

7. Taniora v Crown - Pukemakoiti 2 and 4 (2018) 390 Aotea MB 268 (390 AOT 268) [pdf, 357 KB]

   ...of the trust: (b) the proper administration and management of the business of the trust: (c) the preservation of the assets of the trust: (d) the collection and distribution of the income of the trust. [20] In Rameka v Hall, the Court of Appeal noted that these general duties are not exhaustive and general trustee law principles are also relevant, as is the applicable trust order.7 In other words, trustees are subject to traditional trustee duties with the statutory overlay...

8. [2021] NZEnvC 085 Rangitane o Tamaki v Manawatu-Wanganui Regional Council [pdf, 1.5 MB]

   IN THE ENVIRONMENT COURT AT WELLINGTON I TE KOTI TAIAO O AOTEAROA KI TE WHANGANUI-A-TARA IN THE MATTER OF BETWEEN AND AND Decision No. [2021] NZEnvC 085 appeals under s 120 of the Resource Management Act 1991 RANGITANE O TAMAI(! NUI-A-RUA INCORPORATED (ENV-2018-WLG-000034) TARARUA DISTRICT COUNCIL (ENV-2018-WLG-000035) Appellants MANAWATU-WANGANUI REGIONAL COUNCIL Respondent TARARUA DISTRICT COUNCIL Applicant Court: Environment Judge B P Dwyer Environment...

9. [2021] NZEmpC 90 OSS Ltd v Arthur [pdf, 264 KB]

   ...this. Jurisdiction [47] The application is brought under reg 64 of the Employment Court Regulations 2000. The principles are well known. In exercising discretion, the Court takes into account such factors as whether the applicant’s right of appeal would be ineffectual if no stay were to be granted; whether the appeal is brought and is being prosecuted for good reasons; whether the successful party would be effected injuriously by a stay; the effect on third parties; th...

10. Stewart v Eru - Succession to Teressa Ivor Silcock (2020) 200 Waikato Maniapoto MB 184 (200 WMN 184) [pdf, 266 KB]

    ...Te Hiwi Piahana Whānau Trust v Ngāti Tukorehe Tribal Committee and Tahamata Incorporation (2014) 319 Aotea MB 238 (319 AOT 238) at [11]-[13]. 2 Taueki v Horowhenua 11 (Lake) Māori Reservation Trust [2019] Māori Appellate Court MB 652 (2019 APPEAL 652). 3 Karepa v Te Riini – The Kikorangi and Kareti Whānau Trust (2016) 144 Waiariki MB 3 (144 WAR 3), citing Samuels v Matauri X Incorporation – Matauri X Incorporation (2009) 7 Taitokerau Court MB 206 (7 APWH 216). 4 See, for e...