Search Results

1. IAA v van Zyl [2012] NZIACDT 59 (11 September 2012) [pdf, 77 KB]

   ...publication or non-publication. However, for a professional disciplinary body in contemporary New Zealand 6 to operate without its decisions being available to the public would be a truly exceptional situation. [42] The Court of Appeal in R v Liddell [1995] 1 NZLR 538 at 546 per Cooke P said, in relation to the question of name suppression: “[T]he starting point must always be the importance in a democracy of freedom of speech, open judicial proceedings, and the rig...

2. QQ v NP LCRO 121/2012 (15 June 2015) [pdf, 78 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. 4 Review Hearing [16] Mr QQ attended a review hearing in [City] o...

3. HJ v MN LCRO 26/2013 (11 March 2015) [pdf, 149 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. Discussion Standards Committee Process and Investigator’s Enquiry and Re...

4. KR v HS LCRO 227/13 (7 November 2014) [pdf, 107 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 Issue [16] In a professional disciplinary sense, Ms KR’s complai...

5. Evans - Waitara West 52C - (2018) 383 Aotea MB 43 (383 AOT 43) [pdf, 317 KB]

   ...ability, experience, and knowledge of the individual or body; and (b) shall not appoint an individual or body unless it is satisfied that the appointment of that individual or body would be broadly acceptable to the beneficiaries. [10] The Court of Appeal decision Clarke v Karaitiana is the leading authority on the interpretation of s222.5 In that case the Court observed:6 [51] The touchstone is s 222(2) itself. In appointing a trustee, the Court is obliged to have regard to the...

6. Tiopira - Bella Tiopira [2018] Chief Judge's MB 96 (2018 CJ 96) [pdf, 359 KB]

   ...which records that he was born on 13 June 1954. His mother is recorded as Tehohipera Teakau Tiopira and his father is recorded as Naki Tiopira. 1 [2010] Māori Appellate Court MB 167 (2010 APPEAL 167) 2 [2009] Chief Judge’s MB 209-225 (2009 CJ 209) 2018 Chief Judge’s MB 103 [9] Having considered the Report and the evidence provided in support I am satisfied that an error has been made in the presenta...

7. [2017] EmpC 155 Quality Consumables v Hannah [pdf, 150 KB]

   ...High Court Rules 2016, reg 5.45(1). 9 reg 5.45(2). 10 Davidson v Great Barrier Airlines Ltd, above n 5, at [14]. [14] There is a need to balance the interests of the plaintiff and the defendant in the overall exercise. As the Court of Appeal observed in A S McLachlan v Mel Network Ltd:11 [15] 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...

8. BORA Parole Amendment Bill [pdf, 314 KB]

   ...the possibility of an earlier review) of a significant change in an offender’s circumstances or early achievement of risk milestones.[20] 7.5 Offenders may seek internal and judicial review of Board decisions.[21] In addition, offenders may appeal to the High Court against the making of a postponement order.[22] Other matters considered 8. The Bill provides for the mandatory application of the statutory standard release conditions[23] to all paroled offenders, but does not...

9. [2018] NZEmpC 92 Ovation v NZ Meat Workers & Related Trades Union [pdf, 295 KB]

   ...(permitted) and probing for evidence (not permitted)”.4 3 Benge v Air New Zealand Ltd [2011] NZEmpC 26 at [16]. 4 At [18]. [13] Finally, I refer to the well-known dicta of the Court of Appeal in Price Waterhouse v Fortex Group Ltd:5 In marginal cases, it is better to avoid generalities and rules of thumb, and to return to principles. The pleader and Court simply ask, “in the circumstances of this claim”, is that sta...

10. Zhai v The Real Estate Agents Authority [2018] NZREADT 33 [pdf, 178 KB]

    ...Accordingly, Mr Zhai’s application for review is dismissed. zhai-v-the-real-estate-agents-authority-[2018]-nzreadt-33 [31] Pursuant to s 113 of the Act, the Tribunal draws the parties’ attention to s 116 of Act, which sets out the right of appeal to the High Court. The procedure to be followed is set out in part 20 of the High Court Rules. ___________________ Hon P J Andrews Chairperson __________________ Ms C Sandelin Member...