Search Results

1. Auckland Standards Committee 2 v Gardner [2017] NZLCDT 17 [pdf, 203 KB]

   ...required is "more than" mere negligence (noting that mere negligence may now meet the s 214(b) test for unacceptable conduct). Section 214(c) in the Act is equivalent to ss 106(3)(c) and 112(1)(c) of the 1982 Act. I repeat what the Court of Appeal said in the Auckland W of what was then s 112(1)(c) negligence: [41] ... It is common ground that not every act of negligence will be such as to warrant disciplinary action. That is plain from the use of the words "of such a d...

2. BORA Corrections Amendment Bill (No 2) [pdf, 325 KB]

   ...and has procedures in place to minimise the affront to individuals. 31. We have also examined the proposed changes to section 98 of the Act. Under the proposed changes, a prisoner may be strip searched immediately after a hearing or examination or appeal before a Visiting Justice, or appearing before a hearing adjudicator, tribunal or court (clause 9(1)). A prisoner may also be strip searched before and after a hearing before the New Zealand Parole Board (clause 9(2)) and immediately bef...

3. Dorward - Omahu 1A and 1B1A Section 1 (2009) 202 Napier MB 35 (202 NA 35) [pdf, 262 KB]

   ...detennining that the land is Maorifreehold land,' or 202 Napier MB 43 (ii) Any other order is made by the Court as a consequence of which the land becomes lvfaori freehold land." [44] Haddon v Rahui Te Kuri Inc - Pakiri R (1993) 3 Taitokerau Appeal MB 178 (3 APWH 178) is the leading case on the operation of section 2(2)(f) of the Maori Affairs Act 1953. The Appellate Court, in considering the effect of the word "deemed" in section 2(2)(f), noted at paragraphs...

4. BORA Manukau City Council (Control of Graffiti) Bill [pdf, 322 KB]

   ...Attorney- General (Quebec) [1989] 1 SCR 927, 968. 2 Slaight Communications v Davidson 59 DLR (4th) 416; Wooley v Maynard 430 US 705 (1977). 3 In applying section 5, the Ministry of Justice has regarded to the guidelines set out by the Court of Appeal in Ministry of Transport (MOT) v Noort [1993] 3 NZLR 260 Moonen v Film and Literature Board of Review [2000] 2 NZLR 9; and Moonen v Film and Literature Board of Review [2002] 2 NZLR 754. 4 Report of the Report of Manukau City Council On G...

5. BORA Young Offenders (Serious Crimes) Bill [pdf, 408 KB]

   ...a rational and proportionate connection between the provision and that objective.[2] 22. We note that the right protected by section 25(g) has generally been considered to be one that allows few, if any, limitations (see comments of the Court of Appeal in Poumako)[3]. 23. This means that if adopted, the views of Elias CJ and Keith J would have a significant effect upon the manner in which New Zealand gives effect to its international obligations with respect to youth justice pursuant to...

6. Dickinson v The Registrar of the Real Estate Agents Authority [2018] NZREADT 31 [pdf, 195 KB]

   ...not allow the Tribunal any alternative. [49] Accordingly, Mr Dickinson’s application for review is dismissed. [50] Pursuant to s 113 of the Act, the Tribunal draws the parties’ attention to s 116 of the Act, which sets out the right of an 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 ________________...

7. Canterbury Westland Standards Committee 2 v A Practitioner [2020] NZLCDT 32 (13 October 2020) [pdf, 117 KB]

   ...practitioner in the Court Precincts when he was challenged by a security guard about his motorcycle helmet. [15] It is common ground that, on the day in question, the practitioner was at Court not for professional purposes, but in relation to an appeal in the High Court relating to family matters. It is also accepted that having regard to the outcome of those proceedings the practitioner “… would have been and likely presented as very distressed…”. On being asked for the c...

8. Kiriona - Estate of Hiromina Ratima Pakai [2017] Chief Judge's MB 35 (2017 CJ 35) [pdf, 220 KB]

   ...120 Napier MB 214-215 should be amended as sought. Orders [12] Accordingly I make the following orders pursuant to Te Ture Whenua Māori Act 1993: 1 [2010] Māori Appellate Court MB 167 (2010 APPEAL 167) 2 [2009] Chief Judge’s MB 209-225 (2009 CJ 209) 2017 Chief Judge’s MB 44 (a) Section 44(1) amending the order made on 22 July 1985 at 120 Napier MB 214-215, in respect of Hiromina Ratima Pakai or Hiromina Mabel Renat...

9. Bayne - Great Barrier Island [2016] Chief Judge's MB 764 (2016 CJ 764) [pdf, 451 KB]

   ...decision is to be distributed to all parties. Dated at Wellington this 22 nd day of August 2016. W W Isaac CHIEF JUDGE 3 [2010] Maori Appellate Court MB 167 (2010 APPEAL 167)

10. Van Den Bosch - Te Whiti South Lands Trust (2002) 55 Wairoa MB 280 (55 WAI 280) [pdf, 615 KB]

    ...evidence presented by the applicant. He points to a lack of specific detail as to breaches of covenant and as to the cost of repair. He also refers to the decision in Maori Trustee v Rogross Farms Ltd [1994] NZLR 410. In that decision the Court of Appeal held that as a prima facie measure the rule in Joyner and Weeks should apply in cases such as this. This means that the lessor is entitled to damages based on the cost of remedying any breaches of covenant unless the lessee can es...