Search Results

1. Crozier - Succession to Molly Crozier [2023] Chief Judge's MB 531 (2023 CJ 531) [pdf, 304 KB]

   ...209) at [15]. 2023 Chief Judge's MB 539 into account the nature and gravity of the matter at issue.5 This means that the Applicants must establish on the balance of probabilities that there was a mistake or omission. [15] The Court of Appeal has recently confirmed that the power under s 44(1) of the Act falls into two parts:6 The first is an evaluative decision as to whether the order made was “erroneous in fact and law because of any mistake or omission on the part of...

2. McConnor v New Zealand Law Society [2024] NZLCDT 13 (16 May 2024) [pdf, 165 KB]

   ...Only once an applicant has arrived at that point will he or she typically be in a position to identify reliably the triggers of previous wrongdoing and the mechanisms necessary to avoid its recurrence. [12] Various Tribunal, High Court and Court of Appeal decisions concerning Mr McConnor’s wrongdoing and strike-off were produced and analysed via an affidavit by a New Zealand Law Society regulator. Mr McConnor submits that, as evidence, these items are not permitted by s 50 Evidenc...

3. [2024] NZREADT 05 CAC v Pang (6 March 2024) [pdf, 227 KB]

   ...resulting from the case led him to reconsider his career in the industry and to relocate to China. Accusations of dishonesty were deeply hurtful and his integrity was questioned without understanding his difficult circumstances. [25] Mr Pang appeals for consideration of the penalty imposed and an understanding of the extenuating circumstances surrounding his actions. He is committed to rectifying his mistake and moving forward responsibly. [26] On 21 February 2024, Mr Pang sen...

4. Whata v Pryor - Mourea Papakainga 3E9 Māori Reservation (2025) 336 Waiariki MB 261 (336 WAR 261) [pdf, 310 KB]

   ...Meroiti, the principles concerning the grant of a permanent injunction were summarised as follows:4 2 Te Ture Whenua Māori Act, s 37. 3 Taueki v Horowhenua Sailing Club - Horowhenua 11 (Lake) Block [2014] Māori Appellate Court MB 60 (2014 APPEAL 60). 4 Meroiti v Meroiti [2025] Māori Appellate Court MB 142 (2025 APPEAL 142) at [32]. 336 Waiariki MB 267 (a) The Court must be satisfied that the grant of the injunction would not cause disproportionate hardship. (b) The...

5. Kereopa - Succession to Pukawa Ngatawa [2025] Chief Judge's MB 480 (2025 CJ 480) [pdf, 1018 KB]

   ...that standard’s inherent flexibility that takes into account the nature and gravity of the matter at issue.3 This means that the applicant must establish on the balance of probabilities that there was a mistake or omission. [16] The Court of Appeal has confirmed that the power under s 44(1) falls into two parts:4 The first is an evaluative decision as to whether the order made was “erroneous in fact or in law because of any mistake or omission on the part of the court or the...

6. Wharewera - Succession to Ani Maaka or Annie Maaka [2024] Chief Judge's MB 1299 (2024 CJ 1299) [pdf, 460 KB]

   ...that standard’s inherent flexibility that takes into account the nature and gravity of the matter at issue.9 This means that the applicant must establish on the balance of probabilities that there was a mistake or omission. [17] The Court of Appeal has confirmed that the power under s 44(1) of the Act falls into two parts:10 9 Tau v Nga Whanau O Morven & Glenavy – Waihao 903 Section IX Block [2010] Māori Appellate Court MB 167 (2010 APPEAL 167). 10 Inia v Julian [20...

7. Kingi - Succession to Te Punga Barclay [2025] Chief Judge's MB 61 (2025 CJ 61) [pdf, 527 KB]

   ...mistake or omission. 6 Ashwell – Rawinia or Lavinia Ashwell (nee Russell) [2009] Chief Judge’s MB 209 (2009 CJ 209) at [15]. 7 Tau v Nga Whānau o Morven and Glenavy – Waihao 903 Section IX Block [2010] Māori Appellate Court MB 167 (2010 APPEAL 167). 2025 Chief Judge's MB 75 [16] The Court of Appeal has confirmed that the power under s 44(1) of the Act falls into two parts:8 The first is an evaluative decision as to whether the order made was “erroneous in...

8. Te Puia v Cork - Succession to Guy Gerald Kau Kau [2025] Chief Judge's MB 129 [pdf, 444 KB]

   ...that standard’s inherent flexibility that takes into account the nature and gravity of the matter at issue.3 This means that the applicant must establish on the balance of probabilities that there was a mistake or omission. [14] The Court of Appeal has confirmed that the power under s 44(1) falls into two parts:4 The first is an evaluative decision as to whether the order made was “erroneous in fact and law because of any mistake or omission on the part of the court or the...

9. [2025] NZREADT 24 - CT v REA (14 July 2025) [pdf, 276 KB]

   ...consideration; or (4) was plainly wrong. [23] It was submitted by the Registrar that, subject to these limitations, the Registrar’s decision must be confirmed, even if the Tribunal might come to a different decision on the merits if it was a general appeal. [24] We accept counsel’s submissions as to the nature of this review. We will, in deciding whether these limited grounds of review have been made out, need to make some assessment of the merits, without reaching any conclu...

10. Canterbury Westland Standards Committee v Williams [2012] NZLCDT 16 [pdf, 100 KB]

    ...received by her Ms Williams was charged in the criminal jurisdiction of the District Court and initially found guilty in respect of five charges of false accounting laid under s.260 of the Crimes Act 1961. [4] That conviction was overturned on appeal to the High Court. However the findings, in particular as to Ms Williams’s credibility, were not disturbed. [5] Following negotiations between counsel the original charges were amended so as to remove the wording “... so as to dece...