Search Results

1. Complaints Assessment Committee 409 v Ganesh [2018] NZREADT 27 [pdf, 195 KB]

   ...penalty decision. He is also ordered to pay a fine of $5,000 to the Authority, within 20 working days of this decision. [47] 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 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 N Dangen Member...

2. [2018] NZEnvC 115 Auckland Council v KI Braines [pdf, 403 KB]

   ...Given the position now reached by the parties, the only remaining issue that I see outstanding in respect of Mr Braines' concerns in this light is what level of ongoing tenancy at the main house was envisaged. There was nothing in the abatement appeal order that identifies the issue of the use of the main house. Whether this was commented on in passing or not in 2013 is unclear at this stage. The agreement reached between the parties in 2018 was one simply recorded by the Court,...

3. Complaints Assessment Committee 403 v Zhang [2018] NZREADT 30 [pdf, 192 KB]

   ...hearing is required, a telephone conference will be arranged so that appropriate orders may be made as to filing submissions. [51] Pursuant to s 113 of the Act, the Tribunal draws the parties’ attention to s 116, 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 __________________ Mr G Denley Member ________...

4. BORA Births, Deaths, Marriages, and Relationships Registration Bill [pdf, 249 KB]

   ...rationally connected with the objective, impair freedom of expression no more than is reasonably necessary, and are in due proportion to the importance of the objective. The limits are small and tightly constrained, and an individual can, under cl 30, appeal a decision to not register a name to the Family Court within 28 working days after the decision was made and the affected party notified. 15. We therefore conclude that the limits on what a person’s name can be are justified for t...

5. [2017] NZEmpC 98 Farmer Motor Group Ltd v McKenzie [pdf, 167 KB]

   ...Kiely’s Best Practice Guide, payment in lieu of notice has been accepted as sometimes constituting notice, but not if the employee is engaged under a trial period. 8 Kiely refers to Coca Cola Amatil v Kaczorowski, but while the Court of Appeal in that case recognised that an employer might have a customary practice in 6 Modern Transport Engineers (2002) Ltd v Phillips [2016] NZEmpC 68. 7 Henderson v The Flooring Centre Ltd...

6. Brown v TPL 4 Limited - Motatau 1B5B5 (2017) 158 Taitokerau MB 88 (158 TTK 88) [pdf, 208 KB]

   ...relationship with the trustees, and the means of the trust (which at present is not known), are relevant 10 Nicholls v Nicholls – Part Papaaroha 6B Block [2011] Māori Appellate Court MB 64 (2011 APPEAL 64). 158 Taitokerau MB 99 factors for them to consider. I encourage the parties to discuss this issue to see if it can be resolved by agreement. If it cannot, and costs are sought, the parties will have to file submiss...

7. Kepa v Kautai - Estate of James Keepa (2016) 52 Takitimu MB 256 (52 TKT 256) [pdf, 279 KB]

   ...considers may assist it to deal effectively with the matters before it, but shall ensure that the parties are kept fully informed of all such matters and, where appropriate, given an opportunity to reply. [23] This was underscored by the Court of Appeal in The Proprietors of Mangakino Township v Māori Land Court: 9 [25] We agree also with the High Court that the power for the Maori Land Court to direct the preparation of an independent report on the affairs of a trust for the...

8. Staite v Greenville - Paeroa East 4B2C2 (2002) 264 Rotorua MB 132 (264 ROT 132) [pdf, 711 KB]

   ...Brookers 1977. I also have regard to the judgement of Cousins and Wils.on (Supra). As an appropriate figure to mark the Courts censure of outrageous conduct, I award the figure of $2,000.00. INTEREST AND COSTS The High Court and the Court of Appeal have power to award interest down to the date of judgement, pursuant to s87 of the Judicature Act 1908. The District Court has been given this power pursuant to s628 of the District Courts Act 1947. The issue of interest was not argued...

9. The Elected Representatives v Hauraki Maori Trust Board (2007) 127 Waikato MB 163 (127 W 163) [pdf, 2.7 MB]

   ...to be heard." Both Counsel accepted that the section was expressed in wide terms and that the Maori Land Court has jurisdiction to make a pre-hearing award of costs . In exercising my discretion I am guided by the decision of the Court of Appeal In Berkett v Cave [2001]1 NZLR 667, where the Court said at paragraph 13: "The authorities can be summarised as indicating that to obtain such an order the applicant must, as a minimum, show: (I.) The case mounted is clearly argua...

10. Takarangi - Hautu 2B1B2A No 3 (2017) 375 Aotea MB 42 (375 AOT 42) [pdf, 371 KB]

    ...6 Proprietors of Mangakino Township v The Māori Land Court, CA65/99, 16 June 1999; Clarke v Karaitiana [2011] NZCA 154 7 Kemp v Kemp – Wiremu Keepa Karauria Kaiwhata Whānau Trust [2010] Maori Appellate Court MB 7 (2010 APPEAL 7) 375 Aotea MB 46 were paid $500 on that day. In addition, Mr Bhullar submits that, according to the evidence given by Frances Ketu, a further 26 shareholders have been paid $500 since that meeting. [17] Mr Baxter, counsel appo...