Search Results

1. Putataua Bay Holdings Ltd v Pere - Lot 189 DP 393664 (2014) 82 Taitokerau MB 139 (82 TTK 139) [pdf, 91 KB]

   ...succeed. [26] New Zealand courts have also adopted this reasoning, emphasising that an assessment of whether or not a serious question to be tried in fact existed could not be brushed over lightly. In Roseneath Holdings Ltd v Grieve, the Court of Appeal summarised the essential purpose of an interim injunction: The object of an interim injunction is to protect the plaintiff from harm occasioned by any breach of rights, that is the subject of current litigation, for which the plain...

2. [2014] NZEmpC 216 Scarborough v Micron Security Products Ltd interlocutory [pdf, 72 KB]

   ...Ms Scarborough’s challenge to the determination of the Authority there is no basis upon which the Court could undertake a judicial review. The Act is specific as to the entitlement of the Court to judicially review the Authority. Even if an appeal by way of a challenge were not pending and even if Ms Scarborough had adopted required procedures, which she has not, there is nothing set out by her to bring the matter within the very narrow grounds of lack of jurisdiction entitling th...

3. [2015] NZEmpC 15 Vulcan Steel Ltd v Walker [pdf, 80 KB]

   ...it was said that: 5 In applications of this kind it is necessary carefully to weigh all of the factors in the balance between the right of a successful litigant to have the fruits of a judgment and the need to preserve the position in case the appeal is successful. Often it is possible to secure an intermediate position by conditions or undertakings and each case must be determined on its own circumstances. Discussion [17] I consider the following matters to be relevant to t...

4. Hawkes Bay Standards Committee v McKay [2014] NZLCDT 57 [pdf, 173 KB]

   ...were not heard for almost two and a half years from their inception. This was not simply by mounting a straightforward defence but by engaging in a series of interlocutory applications which were found to be without merit and pursuing them on appeal as far as he was able. [15] Furthermore his manner of defence involved an attack on the honesty and integrity of his client. He blamed her for what he saw as his own misfortune in facing charges with no insight whatsoever as to his con...

5. CAC 20006 v Azimi [2014] NZREADT 97 [pdf, 33 KB]

   ...Authority as prosecutor. That $5,000 is to be paid to the Registrar of the Authority at Wellington within two calendar months of the date of this decision. [26] Pursuant to s.113 of the Act, we record that any person affected by this decision may appeal against it to the High Court by virtue of s.116 of the Act. ______________________________ Judge P F Barber Chairperson ______________________________ Mr J Gaukrodger Member _____________________________...

6. Threshold REAA CAC 20005 v Drever [2014] NZREADT 41 [pdf, 36 KB]

   ...direct our Registrar to arrange a Directions Hearing by telephone with our Chairman as to an appropriate timetable procedure towards a fixture before us. [27] Pursuant to s.113 of the Act, we record that any person affected by this decision may appeal against it to the High Court by virtue of s.116 of the Act. ______________________________ Judge P F Barber Chairperson ______________________________ Ms N Dangen Member ______________________________ Ms...

7. [2013] NZEmpC 214 South Pacific Ltd v Tian [pdf, 75 KB]

   ...Regulation 6(2)(a)(ii). 4 EMC Auckland AC15/07, 27 March 2007. overall interests of justice, having regard to the particular circumstances of the case before it. The interests of both parties must be weighed carefully. [7] As the Court of Appeal observed in A S McLachlan Ltd v MEL Network Ltd: 5 [15] The rule itself contemplates an order for security where the plaintiff will be unable to meet an adverse award of costs. That must be taken as contemplating also that...

8. Director of Proceedings v Crampton (Costs) [2015] NZHRRT 39 [pdf, 51 KB]

   ...Police (Costs) [2013] NZHRRT 31. 5 [12.4] On the other hand, understanding and compassion are equally important. See Meek v Ministry of Social Development [2013] NZHRRT 28 and Andrews v Commissioner of Police (Costs) [2014] NZHRRT 31 upheld on appeal in Commissioner of Police v Andrews [2015] NZHC 745 at [65], [68] and [73] to [74]. Discussion [13] Were Mr Crampton and his wife in better health the Director’s application for costs would have been hard to resist. There is no...

9. C v H LCRO 49 / 2009 (27 May 2009) [pdf, 21 KB]

   ...raised until very late in the day and was in fact not raised at all in the rent review process itself (which appears to have been finally resolved by agreement). It is fair to say that the point is a highly technical one. [14] The Court of Appeal has stated that a lawyer is not liable "for mistake in a nice and difficult point of law but he must measure up to the degree of professional competence which would be exercised by the reasonably competent and careful solicitor in...

10. MS v HF LCRO 183/2013 (30 October 2014) [pdf, 42 KB]

    ...Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008 (the Rules)] the Committee confirmed that “lawyers also have a fundamental duty to act on instructions from their clients and to keep these confidential”.5 [9] The decision cites a Court of Appeal decision which examined a lawyer’s duty to their client, and concludes its discussion of the complaint by stating that: 6 To investigate [the complaint] would unavoidably require inquiry into the instructions between lawyer and cli...