Search Results

1. Hemara - Estate of Marion Gloria Puke [2015] Chief Judge's MB 611 (2015 CJ 611) [pdf, 358 KB]

   ...error has been made in the presentation of the facts of the case to the Court when succession was made to the deceased’s Māori land interests. 1 [2010] Māori Appellate Court MB 167 (2010 APPEAL 167) 2 [2009] Chief Judge’s MB 209-225 (2009 CJ 209) 2015 Chief Judge’s MB 617 [11] Accordingly, I now grant this application and make the following orders as set out below: Orders [12] In terms of section 44(1) of Te...

2. [2016] NZ EmpC 29 Kilpatrick v Air NZ Ltd [pdf, 93 KB]

   ...programme. However, as Ms Kilpatrick’s challenge was commenced well before the introduction of the guideline, the application for costs in these proceedings needs to be dealt with on the basis of established principles contained in the Court of Appeal judgments of Victoria University of Wellington v Alton-Lee, 4 Binnie v Pacific Health Ltd 5 and Health Waikato Ltd v Elmsly. 6 [9] The consideration of costs involves a two-stage process on the basis that costs will generally...

3. Putataua Bay Holdings Ltd v Pere - Lot 189 DP 393664 (2014) 82 Taitokerau MB 139 (82 TTK 139) [pdf, 91 KB]

   ...succeed. [26] New Zealand courts have also adopted this reasoning, emphasising that an assessment of whether or not a serious question to be tried in fact existed could not be brushed over lightly. In Roseneath Holdings Ltd v Grieve, the Court of Appeal summarised the essential purpose of an interim injunction: The object of an interim injunction is to protect the plaintiff from harm occasioned by any breach of rights, that is the subject of current litigation, for which the plain...

4. [2014] NZEmpC 216 Scarborough v Micron Security Products Ltd interlocutory [pdf, 72 KB]

   ...Ms Scarborough’s challenge to the determination of the Authority there is no basis upon which the Court could undertake a judicial review. The Act is specific as to the entitlement of the Court to judicially review the Authority. Even if an appeal by way of a challenge were not pending and even if Ms Scarborough had adopted required procedures, which she has not, there is nothing set out by her to bring the matter within the very narrow grounds of lack of jurisdiction entitling th...

5. [2015] NZEmpC 15 Vulcan Steel Ltd v Walker [pdf, 80 KB]

   ...it was said that: 5 In applications of this kind it is necessary carefully to weigh all of the factors in the balance between the right of a successful litigant to have the fruits of a judgment and the need to preserve the position in case the appeal is successful. Often it is possible to secure an intermediate position by conditions or undertakings and each case must be determined on its own circumstances. Discussion [17] I consider the following matters to be relevant to t...

6. Hawkes Bay Standards Committee v McKay [2014] NZLCDT 57 [pdf, 173 KB]

   ...were not heard for almost two and a half years from their inception. This was not simply by mounting a straightforward defence but by engaging in a series of interlocutory applications which were found to be without merit and pursuing them on appeal as far as he was able. [15] Furthermore his manner of defence involved an attack on the honesty and integrity of his client. He blamed her for what he saw as his own misfortune in facing charges with no insight whatsoever as to his con...

7. CAC 20006 v Azimi [2014] NZREADT 97 [pdf, 33 KB]

   ...Authority as prosecutor. That $5,000 is to be paid to the Registrar of the Authority at Wellington within two calendar months of the date of this decision. [26] 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 J Gaukrodger Member _____________________________...

8. Threshold REAA CAC 20005 v Drever [2014] NZREADT 41 [pdf, 36 KB]

   ...direct our Registrar to arrange a Directions Hearing by telephone with our Chairman as to an appropriate timetable procedure towards a fixture before us. [27] 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 ______________________________ Ms N Dangen Member ______________________________ Ms...

9. [2013] NZEmpC 214 South Pacific Ltd v Tian [pdf, 75 KB]

   ...Regulation 6(2)(a)(ii). 4 EMC Auckland AC15/07, 27 March 2007. overall interests of justice, having regard to the particular circumstances of the case before it. The interests of both parties must be weighed carefully. [7] As the Court of Appeal observed in A S McLachlan Ltd v MEL Network Ltd: 5 [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...

10. Director of Proceedings v Crampton (Costs) [2015] NZHRRT 39 [pdf, 51 KB]

    ...Police (Costs) [2013] NZHRRT 31. 5 [12.4] 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]. Discussion [13] Were Mr Crampton and his wife in better health the Director’s application for costs would have been hard to resist. There is no...