Search Results

1. Marine and Costal Area - Customary marine title group planning document [pdf, 147 KB]

   ...documents must follow the process set out in Schedule 1 of the RMA and meet the requirements in Part 5 of the RMA (section 93(9)). This ensures that any alterations in a proposed regional document are subject to public submissions and potentially, appeal. It also means that all relevant matters are weighed and balanced in the process, including costs and benefits identified through the section 32 analysis and the provisions of Part 2. Is it possible for no alterations to be made to a r...

2. The Crown - Hereheretau B2M (2008) 124 Wairoa MB 119 (124 WR 119) [pdf, 197 KB]

   ...Huka tfie remail1ing . portion of my share in Hereheretau Number 2 Beach Reserve also the whole of my share in Hereheretau Number 2 B6 - the place of my residence - ALL my share in Hereheretau Number 2 Block (the Hereheretau Block at present under appeal and not subdivided) ALL my share in the Ngamotu Block ALSO all or any unascertained or undefined interests in any other lands whatsoever I ALSO give to Materoa Huka all my personal property and effects whatsoever kind including " [...

3. Niao - Lot 39A Sec 2B No 2B No 2A Parish of Matatā (2017) 163 Waiariki MB 22 (163 WAR 22) [pdf, 168 KB]

   ...the trustees or on any application to the Court. 8 8 Whakatāne MB 130, dated 4 December 1903, per Hohepa Poia 163 Waiariki MB 27 [22] The parties may also want to consider the Court of Appeal decision Clarke v Karaitiana. 9 This case concerned meeting process and procedure including the power to call a meeting of owners under Part 9 of the Act with relevance to whether there is a trust. [23] In conclusion, I consider tha...

4. Canterbury Standards Committee v Sisson [2011] NZLCDT 35 [pdf, 143 KB]

   ...rely on her integrity, probity, and trustworthiness.” Previous offending [14] Ms Sisson was found guilty of misconduct on 20 August 2008 in failing to honour an undertaking she had given to a building society. In the course of an unsuccessful appeal by Ms Sisson against that decision French J, in her decision of 7 July 2009 referred to findings of the Tribunal that Ms Sisson had failed to be “honest and upfront” with the building society. [15] Earlier in 2004 Ms Sisson also...

5. BORA Reserve Bank of New Zealand Amendment Bill [pdf, 318 KB]

   ...Melanie Webb Manager – Ministerial Advice Office of Legal Counsel Stuart Beresford Acting Manager Bill of Rights/Human Rights 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 [1992] 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; as well as the Supreme Court of Canada’s decis...

6. BORA Land Transport (Enforcement Powers) Amendment Bill [pdf, 297 KB]

   ...Impoundment does not occur in order to facilitate forfeiture, as release occurs after 28 days even if - as will generally be the case - charges are yet to be determined; and 9.3. Impoundment can also cease before the expiry of the 28 day period on appeal by the driver or owner on various grounds, rather than only when charges have been dismissed or do not proceed: see ss 102(1) and 110 LTA. 10. also note, in this respect, that the explanatory note to the Bill records serious risks to pu...

7. BORA Limitation Bill [pdf, 285 KB]

   ...instances; and 2.3 Introduces a “longstop period” of 15 years beyond which exceptions to the general limitation periods will not normally be available. Application of limitation period to claims under the Bill of Rights Act 3. The Court of Appeal held in Sugrue (PF) Ltd v Attorney-General [2004] 1 NZLR 207 that the limitation provisions in s 4(1) of the current Limitation Act did not encompass such claims, although the Court did indicate that delay in pursuing a claim was a factor...

8. BORA Electoral (Finance Reform and Advance Voting) Amendment Bill [pdf, 306 KB]

   ...Harper, above n 7, at [48] and [144]. 11. Clause 16 and s 207K of the Electoral Act 1993. Such restrictions are readily upheld: see, for example, Harper v Canada (Attorney-General) (2002) 22 DLR (4th) 275, [193] & [289] (British Columbia Court of Appeal; reversed, but not on this point, by Harper, above n 7) and Citizens United, above n 8, 46-47. The exclusion of non-residents does not engage any ground of discrimination under s 19(1) of the Bill of Rights Act and s 21 of the Hum...

9. BORA Employment Relations (Protection of Young Workers) Amendment Bill [pdf, 290 KB]

   ...a. it draws a distinction on one of the prohibited grounds of discrimination; and b. the distinction involves material disadvantage to one or more classes of individuals. 7. In Ministry of Health v Atkinson, the Court of Appeal held that “differential treatment on a prohibited ground of a person or group in comparable circumstances will be discriminatory if, when viewed in context, it imposes a material disadvantage on the person or group differentiated against...

10. Solomon - Manukau Lands Trust (2018) 51 Te Waipounamu MB 40 (51 TWP 40) [pdf, 204 KB]

    ...The Court has power to add, reduce, or replace trustees per s 239 of Te Ture Whenua Māori Act 1993. Section 222(2) of the Act sets out the relevant factors when appointing trustees. [10] I adopt the principles which were set out by the Court of Appeal in Clarke v Karaitiana:2 [51] The touchstone is s 222(2) itself. In appointing a trustee, the Court is obliged to have regard to the ability, experience and knowledge of the individual concerned. In considering those issues, the Co...