Search Results

1. [2012] NZEmpC 58 Evolution E-Business Ltd v Smith [pdf, 110 KB]

   ...various email exchanges between the parties which indicated some frustration on his part in resolving the costs issue because Evolution had changed its legal representation and was obtaining a second opinion as to whether or not it would file an appeal in the matter. [4] On 13 October 2011, a memorandum was filed on behalf of the plaintiff with respect to the issue of costs. It confirmed that Evolution had changed its legal representation to Russell McVeagh and that Mr Skelton ha...

2. CAC20005 v Morton-Jones [2015] NZREADT 71 [pdf, 141 KB]

   ...internal controls and conduct internal checks and audits in real estate firms; and US26152 – Explain the principles of ethics applying to real estate practice. [39] 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 G Denley Member ______________________________...

3. Deputy Registrar v Trustees of Okahukura 8M2C2C2B Trust - Okahukura 8M2C2C2B Trust (2015) 337 Aotea MB 101 (337 AOT 101) [pdf, 188 KB]

   ...(whether by way of injunction or otherwise.) [22] It is trite law that trustees must adhere to their duties and any suggestion as to a lack of knowledge of such responsibilities is no defence against a claim of breach of duty. The Court of Appeal judgment Rameka v Hall underscored the relevant duties including the principal obligation of being familiar with the terms of the trust. 12 I adopt the principles set out in that decision. Discussion Were the legal costs rea...

4. Wawatai(Tate) - Estate of Te Raana Waiti (2014) 88 Taitokerau MB 233 (88 TTK 233) [pdf, 110 KB]

   ...variety of estoppel is res judicata. This results from the rule which prevents the parties to a judicial determination from litigating the same question over again, even though the determination is demonstrably wrong. Except in proceedings by way of appeal, the parties bound by the judgment are estopped from questioning it. As between one another, they may neither pursue the same cause of action again, nor may they again litigate any issue which was an essential element in the decis...

5. Chase-Seymour - Paenoa Te Akau (2015) 114 Waiariki MB 195 (114 WAR 195) [pdf, 209 KB]

   ...formerly known Rangatira 8A10E and 8A14A. I made those orders conditional only on the survey of those blocks. I am therefore limited to those issues. Mr Fitzsimmon’s issues arise in relation to Rangatira 8A10B. It is open to Mr Fitzsimmons to appeal the orders should he wish to revisit the substantive matters concerning the partition orders made on 17 December 2012. [31] I therefore make an order determining that the partition orders made on 17 December 2012 be amended per s...

6. Ratima - Whirinaki 3 (formerly known as Whirinaki No 1 Section 2F2C) (2015) 126 Waiariki MB 73 (126 WAR 73) [pdf, 202 KB]

   ...party: 3 Samuels v Matauri X Incorporation (2009) 7 Te Taitokerau Appellate MB 261 (7 APWH 261). see also Nicholls v Nicholls - Part Papaaroha 6B Block [2011] Māori Appellate Court MB 64 (2011 APPEAL 64); Riddiford v Te Whaiti (2001) 13 Takitimu Appellate MB 184 (13 ACTK 184); Manuirirangi v Paraninihi ki Waitotara Incorporation (2002) 15 Whanganui Appellate MB 64 (15 WGAP 64) and De Loree v Mokomoko – Hiwarau C (2008) 11 Waiarik...

7. Cooper v Cooper - Motatau 2 Section 22D (2015) 118 Taitokerau MB 184 (118 TTK 184) [pdf, 182 KB]

   ...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 of this Act or an appeal under Part 2 of this Act 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 Maori Trustee. (3) Any injunction made by...

8. Recorded Music NZ v VOD02014-D-R-9488397 [2014] NZCOP 2 [pdf, 219 KB]

   ...further we will be pleading not guilty as we have had travellers staying on top of our 6 new permanent flatmates all with different computers and if this goes to a tribunal we can confirm the amount of people (travellers) staying here and will be appealing this I [ ] brother is writing this, ring me. Regards ring to deal with this please reply before 18 April I also have medical evidence of a brain injury and need this correspondence portrayed via a house meeting as cannot read w...

9. Recording Industry Association of New Zealand v Telecom NZ 3553 [2013] NZCOP 6 [pdf, 44 KB]

   ...Looking at the factors mentioned in r12(3), the word “flagrancy” also appears in s 121(2) of the Copyright Act 1994, in relation to the calculation of damages for infringement under other parts of the Act. RIANZ pointed to the New Zealand Court of Appeal decision in Wellington Newspapers Ltd v. Dealers Guide Ltd 1994 2 NZLR 666 as an indication of the approach that the Tribunal might take. However we think that s 121(2) operates in an entirely different context to the present one....

10. Recording Industry Association of New Zealand v TCLE-A-T6054929 [2013] NZCOP 4 [pdf, 44 KB]

    ...subclause 12(3): (a) The flagrancy of the infringement; [28] The Tribunal does not consider the infringements that are the subject of this application to be “flagrant.” The Tribunal takes account of the applicant’s references to the Court of Appeal’s recent decision in Skids Programme Management Limited v McNeill [2013] 1 NZLR 1 and the analysis of “flagrancy” that case sets forth. In the present application, however, only the minimum conditions for an application unde...