Search Results

1. EGX v BSL [2011] NZIACDT 17 (6 July 2011) [pdf, 75 KB]

   ...information which identifies either the Complainant or the Adviser will be removed, and the decision will be published in that form. That direction will reserve the right for any party to apply for a different order in a particular case. [19] The Court of Appeal in R v Liddell [1995] 1 NZLR 538, 546 per Cooke P said in relation to the question of name suppression: “The starting point must always be the importance in a democracy of freedom of speech, open judicial proceedings and the r...

2. XX v UW LCRO 185/14 (12 June 2015) [pdf, 29 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 Hearing [8] Mr XX attended a review hearing in [City] on 25 May 20...

3. BORA Public Works (Prohibition of Compulsory Acquisition of Māori Land) Amendment Bill [pdf, 268 KB]

   ...specific, contained definition minimally impairs the right or freedom no more than is reasonably necessary to achieve the objective of protecting Māori land from acquisition. 15. Finally, in New Zealand Māori Council v Attorney-General, the Court of Appeal considered that ’[t]he duty of the Crown is not merely passive but extends to active protection of Māori people in the use of their lands and waters to the fullest extent.’ 6 The Bill’s objectives reinforce this principle...

4. 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...

5. 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...

6. 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...

7. 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...

8. 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...

9. [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...

10. 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...