Search Results

1. BORA Financial Service Providers (Registration and Dispute Resolution) Bill [pdf, 308 KB]

   ...of Rights Act. Jeff Orr Chief Legal Counsel Office of Legal Counsel Stuart Beresford Acting Manager, Bill of Rights/Human Rights Public Law Footnotes 1 In applying section 5, we have had regard to the guidelines set out by the Court of Appeal in Ministry of Transport (MOT) v Noort [1993] 3 NZLR 260; Moonen v Film and Literature Board of Review [2000] 2 NZLR 9; and Moonen v Film and Literature Board of Review [2002] 2 NZLR 754. 2 Lavigne v Ontario Public Service Employees Uni...

2. BORA Motor Vehicle Sales Amendment Bill [pdf, 377 KB]

   ...that bans have effect for a period of 5 years starting on and from the date of the conviction, failure or matter, as the case may be, for which the ban is imposed. If a ban is issued concurrent with a fine, the effect may be severe. 7. The Court of Appeal in Puli'uvea v Removal Review Authority held that the right not to be subjected to disproportionately severe treatment under section 9 of the Bill of Rights Act is not triggered unless the treatment is "so excessive as to outr...

3. BORA Copyright (Infringing File Sharing) Amendment Bill [pdf, 294 KB]

   ...of Review [2002] 2 NZLR 754 2. Butlers The New Zealand Bill of Rights Act: A Commentary (Wellington: 2005) 311. 3. In applying section 5, we have had regard to the guidelines set out by the Supreme Court in Hansen v R [2007] NZSC 7; the Court of Appeal in Ministry of Transport (MOT) v Noort [1993] 3 NZLR 260, Moonen v Film and Literature Board of Review [2000] 2 NZLR 9 and Moonen v Film and Literature Board of Review [2002] 2 NZLR 754; and the Supreme Court of Canada's decision in...

4. BORA Gambling Amendment Bill (No 2) [pdf, 385 KB]

   ...Manager, Ministerial Advice Office of Legal Counsel Margaret Dugdale Policy Manager, Bill of Rights/Human Rights Public Law Group Footnotes 1 In applying section 5, the Ministry of Justice has regard to the guidelines set out by the Court of Appeal in Ministry of Transport (MOT) v Noort [1993] 3 NZLR 260; Moonen v Film and Literature Board of Review [2000] 2 NZLR 9; Moonen v Film and Literature Board of Review [2002] 2 NZLR 754; and the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in R...

5. National Standards Committee 1 v Peters [2020] NZLCDT 34 (27 October 2020) [pdf, 86 KB]

   ...the decision, out of an abundance of caution, in order to preserve the fair trial rights of the accused whom Mr Peters had previously represented. [3] Now that there has been a guilty plea entered in that case,1 the defendant sentenced, and the appeal rights expired, that earlier decision can be released concurrently with the present decision. The Standards Committee Submissions [4] The Standards Committee submits that the seriousness of this misconduct ought to be met by a short...

6. [2021] NZEnvC 049 Kristin School Charitable Trust v Auckland Council [pdf, 333 KB]

   ...waiver, relevant factors include the length of the delay, the reasons for the delay, the scheme of the Act relating to public participation, what has occurred in the proceeding and what effect introducing new parties might have on progressing the appeal to resolution. [13] Kristin School and Auckland Council have consented to the applications for waiver. While that is not determinative, it is a relevant factor in terms of s 281(3)(a). [14] No party has claimed that they will be undu...

7. Acoustic – Supplementary (dated 13 June 2017) [pdf, 241 KB]

   1 BEFORE THE ENVIRONMENT COURT CHRISTCHURCH REGISTRY ENV-2016-CHC-47 IN THE MATTER of an appeal under Section 120 Resource Management Act 1991 BETWEEN BLUESKIN ENERGY LIMITED Appellant AND DUNEDIN CITY COUNCIL Respondent ACOUSTICS – SUPPLEMENTARY JOINT WITNESS STATEMENT 13 June 2017 2 Introduction 1. Malcolm Hunt (engaged by Dunedin City Council) and Stephen Chiles (engaged by Blue...

8. Kumeroa - Raetihi 2B 2C 2C 2A1 (2003) 128 Aotea MB 1 (128 AOT 1) [pdf, 284 KB]

   ...Orornahoe 1781 & 2 (2003) 6 APWH 84 - 88 where an application for a change of status from Maori freehold to General land had been granted by the lower court. The Maori Appellate Court held that as s 136(d) of the Act had not been satisfied the appeal would be allowed and the lower court order changing the status from Maori freehold to Generai land be reversed. Summary Having carefully considered the evidence and submissions of the Applicant, the Court is not satisfied that s136(d)...

9. Auckland Standards Committee v Cropper [2017] NZLCDT 6 [pdf, 76 KB]

   ...1 National Standards Committee v Keith Jefferies [2016] NZLCDT 29. 5 [19] The decision which most closely bears on the present one is that of Jefferies (six months suspension) and we note that this decision is currently under appeal. We accept the submission that the offending in that matter was slightly more serious and that certainly the aggravating features present in that case distinguish it from this, as do the comprehensive and determined steps taken by this...

10. Williams - Matapouri 45 (2019) 199 Taitokerau MB 286 (199 TTK 286) [pdf, 257 KB]

    ...members, however the sales have fallen through. She acknowledges that she has children who are 4 Matthews v Matthews – Estate of Graham Ngahina Matthews [2015] Māori Appellate Court MB 512 (2015 APPEAL 512). 5 Ibid, at [49]. 6 Ibid, at [55]. 7 Phillips v Ashby – Oromahoe 17B2 (2006) 6 Taitokerau Appellate MB 271 (6 APWH 271) at [16]. 199 Taitokeau MB 289 minors who will lose their connection to the land, however, th...