Search Results

1. 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...

2. 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...

3. 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...

4. 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....

5. 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...

6. [2014] NZEmpC 101 Milne v Air New Zealand Ltd [pdf, 112 KB]

   ...Court, I decline her applications for variation. Applications to strike out [17] The defendant has applied to strike out both sets of proceedings on largely (although not exclusively) overlapping grounds. Approach [18] The Court of Appeal has confirmed in New Zealand Fire Service Commission v New Zealand Professional Fire Fighters’ Union Inc, that there is no reason for the Employment Court to approach strike out applications on any other basis than that applying in th...

7. [2014] NZEmpC 211 Pyne Gould Corp Ltd v West [pdf, 94 KB]

   ...(1990) Ltd: 2 [10] In exercising its broad discretion the Court must have regard to the overall justice of the case, and the respective interests of both parties are to be carefully weighed. The balancing exercise was summarised by the Court of Appeal in A S McLachlan Ltd v MEL Network Ltd as follows: 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 f...

8. Dovey Property Holdings Limited – Orokawa 3B Part Lot 8 DP41892 (2013) 57 Taitokerau MB 75 (57 TTK 75) [pdf, 126 KB]

   ...than that for which the proceedings are properly designed and exist, or where the plaintiff in the proceedings is seeking some collateral advantage beyond what the law offers. [37] Counsel also brought my attention to the decision of the Court of Appeal of England and Wales in Gilham v Browning, where May LJ noted: “There is a clear public interest, in addition to the interests of individual litigants, that litigation should be justly, speedily and economically conducted and to...

9. Shepherd v Popata – Konoti A No5 South 2B2 (2013) 57 Taitokerau MB 47 (57 TTK 47) [pdf, 347 KB]

   ...evidence presented in Cout1, and reject Waaka and Norman Popata's challenges to the vesting orders for the following reasons. [l7] First, there has never been any challenge to the vesting orders in the past. That is, there has never been an appeal or an application to the Chief Judge to cOlTect a "mistake". Thus, the transactions have remained unchallenged for over 40 years and are assumed to be conclusive: s 77 of the 1993 Act. [l8] Second, I reject Norman Popata&#...

10. Auckland Standards Committee v Hylan [2014] NZLCDT 31 [pdf, 95 KB]

    ...facilitation of a dishonest scheme, it was a “one off” incident, there was no personal financial gain, and the Tribunal was provided with glowing references on the practitioner’s behalf. In short, a very similar situation to the current one. On appeal against the Tribunal’s decision to strike off the practitioner, a two years suspension was substituted by Peters J in the High Court. I discern no material features of this 9 Above...