Search Results

1. GL v JS LCRO 289/2013 (30 October 2014) [pdf, 56 KB]

   ...the LCRO considers that the Review can be adequately determined in the absence of the parties. [29] In Deliu v Hong the High Court made the following observation about the role of the LCRO:6 In my view the power of review is much broader than an appeal. It gives the Review Officer discretion as to the approach to be taken on any particular review as to the extent of the investigations necessary to conduct that review, and therefore clearly contemplates the Review Officer reaching his...

2. Trustees Executors Ltd as trustee for the Simpson Family Trust v Wellington City Council [pdf, 42 KB]

   IN THE WEATHERTIGHT HOMES TRIBUNAL TRI-2007-101-000029 BETWEEN TRUSTEES EXECUTORS LTD as TRUSTEE FOR THE SIMPSON FAMILY TRUST Claimant AND WELLINGTON CITY COUNCIL First Respondent AND HEYHOE BUILDERS LTD Second Respondent AND JEANETTE O’CALLAGHAN Third Respondent AND G R W CONSULTANTS LTD. T/A FIRST WINDOWS AND DOORS Fifth Respondent AND CHRISTOPHER HEYHOE Seventh Respondent AND PAUL SIMPSON Eighth Respondent AND MIRANDA PATRICK Ninth Respon

3. Lee v Wellington City Council [2012] NZWHT Auckland 31 [pdf, 87 KB]

   ...Baragwanath J. [16] In Hartley v Balemi,4 Stevens J concluded that personal involvement does not necessarily mean the physical work needs to be undertaken by a director but may include administering the construction of the building. The Court of Appeal in Body Corporate 202254 v Taylor5 has also more recently considered director liability and analysed the reasoning in Trevor Ivory Limited v Anderson.6 It held that the assumption of responsibility test promoted in that case w...

4. [2017] EmpC 124 Sunair Aviation v Walters [pdf, 175 KB]

   ...justified on financial grounds; 7 At [29]. 8 At [30], citing Hally Labels Ltd v Powell [2015] NZEmpC 92. 9 At [64]. 10 At [66]. 11 At [89]. 12 At [93]. 13 The application refers to an “appeal” but a challenge is meant. (b) Mr Walters’ challenge will require all the evidence in the Authority to be traversed, even on the limited basis on which the challenge is made; (c) The delay in filing a challenge is les...

5. BORA Securities Legislation Bill [pdf, 122 KB]

   ...penalty order and be liable for a fine under the relevant Act for the same conduct.[12] In respect of the civil liability provisions enabling compensation to be ordered in some instances, we draw your attention to the majority decision of the Court of Appeal in the leading case on 26(2), Daniels v Thompson[13] that made it clear that this section must be read as referring: Only to criminal proceedings relating to an offence against the law, for which the person has been tried. What is pr...

6. BORA Employment Relations Amendment Bill [pdf, 269 KB]

   ...bargaining for a MECA, the right to freedom of association is arguably engaged because an employer is required to participate in collective bargaining alongside other employers based on their association with the industry or occupation. 26. The Court of Appeal has previously said that while the right to collective bargaining arises out of the right to freedom of association, it is generally not regarded as an element of freedom of association.3 However, the Canadian Supreme Court...

7. XX v BA LCRO 273/2013, 343/2013, 040/2014 (15 July 2015) [pdf, 60 KB]

   ...has broad powers to conduct her own investigations, including the power to exercise for that purpose all the powers of a standards committee or an investigator, and seek and receive evidence. The statutory power of review is much broader than an appeal, and gives the LCRO discretion as to the approach to be taken on any particular review and the extent of the investigations necessary to conduct that review. Review hearing [12] Mr XX attended a review hearing in [City] on 6 July 2...

8. VM v ND & HB LCRO 249/2012 (30 November 2015) [pdf, 329 KB]

   ...consideration by the Standards Committee, and the award of $3,000, on the basis as set out by the Committee. Censure [40] Mr VM queries what a censure “entails”.11 At the review hearing, referred Mr VM and Mr YK to comments made by the Court of Appeal in New Zealand Law Society v B as to the nature of a censure. In discussing the nature of a reprimand or censure, the Court said:12 Both words envisage a disciplinary tribunal, here a Standards Committee, making a formal or off...

9. AS v DV LCRO 14/2014 (5 August 2014) [pdf, 161 KB]

   ...[24]. 3 Above n 2 at [28]. 4 Above n 2 at [30]. 5 Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008 at Rule 10.7. 3 investigator, and seek and receive evidence. The statutory power of review is much broader than an appeal, and gives the LCRO discretion as to the approach to be taken on any particular review, and the extent of the investigations necessary to conduct that review. Review Hearing [14] On 29 July 2014 Mr AS and Mr DV attended a revie...

10. [2018] NZEmpC 41 Rachelle v Air New Zealand Ltd [pdf, 343 KB]

    ...discretion to grant the application it is appropriate to take into account the merits of the challenge. [31] Balancing the interests of the plaintiff and defendant is the overriding consideration.13 In McLachlan v MEL Network Ltd the Court of Appeal said in reference to rule 5.45:14 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 an order for substantial secur...