Search Results

1. Lohr v Accident Compensation Corporation (Costs) [2016] NZHRRT 36 [pdf, 60 KB]

   ...of Police (Costs) [2013] NZHRRT 31. [6.8.4] 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]. 5 APPLICATION OF THE LAW TO THE FACTS Overview [7] It is true Dr Lohr has not been a model litigant. But few self-represented parties are....

2. Finlay v Baker [pdf, 42 KB]

   ...extent that it is difficult to identify the claimants as subsequent owners of the subject dwelling requiring a subsequent duty of care. 43. I am further assisted in this view by the vulnerability factor in Hamlin. And the comments of the Court of Appeal in Queenstown Lakes District Council v Charterhill Trustees Limited, [2009] NZCA 374 at par 39. Mr Finlay is possibly the least vulnerable person in relation to this building having personally supervised all aspects of its construc...

3. River Oaks Farm Ltd & Ors as Trustees of Ingodwe Trust v Olsson [2010] NZWHT Wellington 17 [pdf, 108 KB]

   IN THE WEATHERTIGHT HOMES TRIBUNAL TRI-2008-101-000052 [2010] NZWHT WELLINGTON 17 BETWEEN RIVER OAKS FARM LIMITED & C & A M THURNELL & L HORNE AS TRUSTEES OF INGODWE TRUST Claimant AND TIMOTHY OLSSON, CHARLOTTE OLSSON & JOHN CRONIN AS TRUSTEES OF THE PICOLLO TRUST First Respondent AND TIMOTHY OLSSON Second Respondent AND DENTON PERRY Third Respondent AND KENT JARMAN Fourth Respondent AND WARWICK SWEETMAN Fifth Respondent AND MAXI

4. Sade - Miriama Mahanga Whanau Trust (2017) 146 Taitokerau MB 75 (146 TTK 75) [pdf, 192 KB]

   ...change of mind is usually insufficient as a ground for termination unless there is an absence of opposition; 8 Larkins v Wi Kaitaia – Waihou Hutoia D2A [2013] Māori Appellate Court MB 159 (2013 APPEAL 159). 9 Ibid, at [27]. 146 Taitokerau MB 79 (b) Termination should be refused where it is likely to result in detriment or create unreasonable disadvantage to affected parties; (c) Evidence of a trust failing to adhere...

5. Brightwell - Okauia B3B1 Block (2017) 135 Waikato Maniapoto MB121 (135 WMN 121) [pdf, 202 KB]

   ...MB 130 [27] It is my view that the actions available to the Court now are to consider any review application that might be filed, or to cancel the occupation order pursuant to ss 330 and 330A. I understand that Evelyn Brightwell intends to appeal this decision. In the circumstances I will refrain from taking any further action in relation to the occupation order until the decision of the Māori Appellate Court is to hand. Pronounced in open Court at 11.45am in Hamilton on...

6. [2017] NZEmpC 38 Eden Group Ltd v Jackson [pdf, 111 KB]

   ...hearings are open to the public and can be freely reported. Documents produced in court are available for inspection. However, the High Court Rules recognise that outside of that hearing process (and a brief window of opportunity relating to the appeal period), persons other than the parties need permission to inspect documents held on the court file. The reason for this distinction was described by Toogood J in X v Standards Committee (No 1) of the New Zealand Law Society in the...

7. [2017] NZEmpC 47 Singh v Trustees of the Wellington Rudolf Steiner Kindergarten Trust [pdf, 104 KB]

   ...the mediator signs the agreed terms of settlement: 1 The settlement is final and binding and enforceable by us; 2 Except for enforcement purposes, neither of us may seek to bring those terms before the Authority or Court whether by action, appeal and application for review or otherwise; 3 The terms of the settlement cannot be cancelled under s 7 of the Contractual Remedies Act 1979; 4 That s 149(4) provides that a person who breaches an agreed term of settlement to which (...

8. Kidwell v Karaitiana - Waipuka 3A3A(2019)78 Tākitimu MB 7 (78 TKT 7) [pdf, 272 KB]

   ...or agent, of rent, purchase money, royalties, or other proceeds of the alienation of land, or of any compensation payable in respect of other revenue derived from the land, affected by any order to which an application under section 45 or an appeal under Part 2 relates. (2) Notwithstanding anything in the Crown Proceedings Act 1950, any injunction made by the court under this section may be expressed to be binding on the Māori Trustee. (3) Any injunction made by the court und...

9. INZ (Calder) v Horan [2019] NZIACDT 23 (23 April 2019) [pdf, 163 KB]

   ...Mr Horan rejects the Tribunal’s previous decision. He repeats his explanation and justification for his conduct given earlier to the Tribunal. He states that he will continue to stand by his actions which, if necessary, will be vindicated on appeal. Mr Horan describes the Code as a ridiculous “Code of Entrapment”. He denies that “we” (immigration advisers) are “the slaves of Africa”. According to him, the Authority and the Tribunal amount to a counterproductive co...

10. Nikora v Trustees of Te Uru Taumatua and Te Komiti o Runga (2019) 221 Waiariki MB 200 (221 WAR 200) [pdf, 282 KB]

    ...or agent, of rent, purchase money, royalties, or other proceeds of the alienation of land, or of any compensation payable in respect of other revenue derived from the land, affected by any order to which an application under section 45 or an appeal under Part 2 relates. (2) Notwithstanding anything in the Crown Proceedings Act 1950, any injunction made by the court under this section may be expressed to be binding on the Māori Trustee. http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public...