Search Results

1. River Oaks Farm Ltd & Ors as Trustees of Ingodwe Trust v Olsson [2010] NZWHT Wellington 17 [pdf, 73 KB]

   SUMMARY Case: River Oaks Farm Ltd & Ors as Trustees of Ingodwe Trust v Olsson & Ors as Trustees of the Picollo Trust – COSTS DECISION File No: TRI 2008-101-000052/ DBH 05463 Citation: [2010] NZWHT Wellington 17 Court: WHT Adjudicator: C Ruthe Date of Decision: 16 June 2010 Background This determination is based on applications filed by the first, second and seventh respondents for costs against the claimants pursuant to s91(1) of the 2006 Act. Applications fo

2. Beattie v Porirua City Council [2011] NZWHT Wellington 18 [pdf, 48 KB]

   ...direct conflict in the evidence as to the responsibility of the various respondents. I am inclined to agree with Mr Robertson on this issue. There are still significant issues in dispute and this has resulted in three different parties filing appeals against the determination issued. [10] In these circumstances I consider that it is unlikely this claim would have settled at a subsequent mediation. Accordingly the costs that the claimants are seeking against the Council coul...

3. BORA State Sector Amendment Bill (No.3) [pdf, 19 KB]

   ...therefore considered whether the process for determining whether or not employees are on strike is consistent with the requirement to observe the principles of natural justice described in section 27 (1) of the Bill of Rights Act. 7. The Court of Appeal has stated that observance of the principles of natural justice is a flexible concept and is very much fact specific.[1] We note that the deeming provision helps to address the problem of geographical and organisational proximity. It is...

4. [2017] NZEnvC 203 Federated Farmers of New Zealand MacKenzie Branch v MacKenzie District Council [pdf, 2.5 MB]

   BEFORE THE ENVIRONMENT COURT I MUA I TE KOOTI TAIAO 0 AOTEARAROA IN THE MATTER AND BETWEEN Decision No. [2017] NZEnvC203 of the Resource Management Act 1991 of appeals under clause 14(1) of the First Schedule to the Act FEDERATED FARMERS OF NEW ZEALAND (INC) MACKENZIE BRANCH (ENV-2009-CHC-193) MOUNT GERALD STATION LIMITED (ENV-2009-CHC-181 ) MACKENZIE PROPERTIES LIMITED (ENV-2009-CHC-183) MERIDIAN ENERGY LIMITED AND GENESIS ENERGY LIMITED (ENV-2009-CHC-184) T...

5. Tamahata Incorporation v John Te Hiwi - Tamahata Incorporation (2010) 251 Aotea MB 5 (251 AOT 5) [pdf, 43 KB]

   ...HARVEY Introduction [1] By decision dated 1 February 2005, 148 Aotea MB 265, the application by John Te Hiwi to investigate the affairs of the Tahamata Incorporation was dismissed. Since then there have not been any applications for rehearing or appeal. [2] Mr Macdonald for the Incorporation now seeks costs from Mr Te Hiwi in the amount of $4,592.25 on a solicitor client basis. That application for costs was filed soon after judgment was issued in 2005. [3] For various reasons...

6. Auckland District Law Society v Dorbu [2009] NZLCDT 6 [pdf, 73 KB]

   ...of that judgment to means of the Registrar to the Auckland District Law Society for investigation were actions of the Judge acting in his judicial capacity and thus he cannot be compellable as a witness (Warren v Warren [1997] QB488 (Court of Appeal), Zanatta v McCleary [1976] 1 NSWLR 230). [18] The application for issue of a summons is declined. D F Clarkson Chair New Zealand Lawyers and Conveyancers Disciplinary Tribunal

7. Expression of interest: District Court Judge [docx, 27 KB]

   ...indicate, by ticking the boxes, the extent of your experience, both civil and criminal, in the following: Court Civil Criminal Details, including number of appearances Supreme Court |_| |_| ______________________________________ Court of Appeal |_| |_| ______________________________________ Court Civil Criminal Details, including total years’ experience High Court Appellant work |_| |_| ______________________________________ High Court |_|...

8. National and Auckland Standards Committees v Orlov [2015] NZLCDT 16 [pdf, 129 KB]

   ...hearing included all interlocutory hearings and hearings on the papers, in addition to the substantive charges themselves. [10] Section 257 has not been thought operative in relation to the Tribunal’s other areas of jurisdiction such as an appeal against refusal of a practising certificate, or in relation to reinstatement of a practitioner to the Roll. Neither of these categories relates to “Charges” against a practitioner. http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2006/000...

9. 30-June-Legal-Aid-News.pdf [pdf, 596 KB]

   ...had a child or young person removed due to abuse or neglect (Subsequent Children)  a new ability for the Chief Executive of the Ministry of Social Development to provide financial or other assistance to permanent caregivers, which can now be appealed if this is declined. The updated fixed fee schedule is here. If you have any questions, please contact your legal aid office. Changes from 4 July 2016 Criminal legal aid fee changes The Legal Services Commissioner has revise...

10. BORA Port Nicholson Block (Taranaki Whanui ki Te Upoko o Te Ika) Claims Settlement Bill [pdf, 283 KB]

    ...subject matter of its historical claims should not be the subject of further litigation. The Crown is satisfied there was the appropriate mandate to enter into such an agreement. This assessment is also consistent with the decision of the Court of Appeal in New Zealand Maori Council v Attorney-General [2008] 1 NZLR 318. 5.2 In that context, exclusion of jurisdiction in respect of the claims, settlement deed and the Bill is an integral part of the settlement process. 6. I note, in this r...