Search Results

1. LCRO 20/2016 LC and CM v JP - Orders (5 April 2019) [pdf, 201 KB]

   ...clear on the face of the Act whether there is a distinction between a censure and a reprimand. The matter was considered in New Zealand Law Society v B. The High Court had considered that a censure was a more serious rebuke. This was rejected on appeal, when it was stated: Both words envisage a disciplinary tribunal, here a Standard Committee, making a formal or official statement rebuking a practitioner for his or her unsatisfactory conduct. A censure or reprimand, however expresse...

2. [2020] NZEnvC 206 O'Reilly v Cruice Farms Ltd [pdf, 1.5 MB]

   ...2020 at [34). Affidavit of G O'Reilly dated 14 August 2020 at [32). 4 a vehicle. Mr O'Reilly referred me to a decision Fadi Antoun v Hutt City Counci/12 which considered the question of what comprises a building and a tiny house in an appeal against an abatement notice proceeding. Relying on that decision, Mr O'Reilly says the new construction is fixed to the existing shed by flashings and corrugated iron and is on piles.13 [1 O] In conclusion, Mr O'Reilly s...

3. FFNZ - EiC - L Hume - Agricultural Science (5 Feb 2021) [pdf, 135 KB]

   ...Currently, I am a member of Federated Farmers’ regional policy team and have 16 years of experience working with regional planning processes, including the Canterbury Natural Resources Regional Plan (from submission through to resolution of High Court appeals); development of the Resource Management (Measurement and Reporting of Water Takes) Regulations 2010 and membership of the implementation taskforce for those regulations; the development of catchment-based flow and allocation...

4. McGregor v McGregor - John Henry McGregor and Pirihia Maraenui Tapine Whānau Trust (2019) 402 Aotea MB 281 (402 AOT 281) [pdf, 260 KB]

   ...satisfactorily; or (b) Because of lack of competence or prolonged absence, the trustee is or will be incapable of carrying out those duties satisfactorily. [9] The leading authorities on the appointment and removal of trustees are the Court of Appeal judgments Clarke v Karaitiana and Rameka v Hall.5 [10] In Clarke on the issue of appointing trustees the Court held:6 [51] The touchstone is s 222(2) itself. In appointing a trustee, the Court is obliged to have regard to the abilit...

5. [2019] NZEmpC 189 McCook v Chief Executive of the Inland Revenue Department [pdf, 217 KB]

   ...kind which justifies joinder. Although it has been held in the High Court that a right to relief may not in fact be required, this prerequisite exists in the present case. d) In Newhaven Waldorf Management Ltd v Allen, the Court of Appeal stated that the threshold for an order under r 4.56 of the HCR was “fairly low” and that:1 A cause of action need not necessarily be advanced (or lie) against a defendant to be added. Indeed, where the plaintiff opposes joinder,...

6. [2018] NZEmpC 108 Butterfield v Alliance Group Ltd [pdf, 250 KB]

   ...Development [2017] NZEmpC 18 at [6]. payment under s 46 of the Legal Services Act. Where a party seeks an order under s 45(5), in general, a Court will make one.8 [26] The purpose of sections such as s 46 was considered by the Court of Appeal in Laverty v Para Franchising Ltd: they are to compensate, to the extent appropriate, part or all of the countervailing disadvantage caused to unaided parties of not being able to recover their costs from a legally aided opponent.9...

7. Saifiti v Shortcliffe - Francis Rudolph Shortcliffe Whanau Trust (2020) 416 Aotea MB 275 (416 AOT 275) [pdf, 171 KB]

   ...children and grandchildren, those are the ones who make the decision. [16] Then again, at 302:6 3 Larkins v Kaitaia - Waihou Hutoia D2A Block [2013] Māori Appellate Court MB 159 (2013 APPEAL 159) 4 403 Aotea MB 299-302 (403 AOT 299-302) 5 Ibid, at 301 6 Ibid, at 302 https://www.maorilandcourt.govt.nz/assets/Documents/Decisions/Larkins-v-Kaitaia-Waihou-Hutoia-D2A-Block-2013-Maori-Appellate-Court-MB-159-2013-APPEAL-159...

8. Motiti Avocados Limited Submissions - 5 December 2017 [pdf, 148 KB]

   IN THE ENVIRONMENT'COURT AT AUCKLAND ENV-2016-348-040 IN THE MATTER of the Resource Management Act 1991 (the Act) AND IN THE MATTER of appeals pursuant to clause 14 of the First Schedule to the Act BETWEEN MOTITI ROHE MOANA TRUST (ENV-2015-AKL-134) NGATI MAKINO HERITAGE TRUST (ENV-2015-AKL-140) NGATI RANGINUI IWI INCORPORATED SOCIETY (ENV-2015-AKL-141) Appellants A N D BAY OF PLENTY REGIONAL COUNCIL Respondent AND Various Section 274 parties SUBMISSIONS ON...

9. [2022] NZEmpC 3 Tupe v The Board of Trustees of Te Manawa O Tuhoe Trust [pdf, 221 KB]

   ...Supreme Court noted in Almond v Read that the merits will not generally be relevant where there has been an insignificant delay as a result of a legal adviser’s error and the proposed respondents have suffered no prejudice (beyond the fact of an appeal).10 The qualifier “generally” was used as it was accepted there were circumstances where the lack of merit is so obvious that the Court is justified in refusing to extend time.11 The question then is whether there is that obvi...

10. [2021] NZEmpC 127 AlKazaz v Deloitte (No. 3) Ltd [pdf, 194 KB]

    ...Deloitte (No. 3) Ltd (formerly known as Asparona Ltd) [2021] NZEmpC 126. 6 Applying via reg 6 of the Employment Court Regulations 2000 which do not deal with applications to cross examine on affidavits. [11] In Kidd v van Hereen, the Court of Appeal held that the words “special circumstances” are wide, comprehensive, and flexible indicating something abnormal, uncommon or out of the ordinary, but something less than extraordinary or unique.7 The Court in that case obser...