Search Results

1. Zhang v Samsung Electronics New Zealand Ltd (Strike Out Application) [2023] NZHRRT 42 [pdf, 175 KB]

   ...those grounds apply have been added to the HRA compels the conclusion that Parliament has been very deliberate in what will and will not amount to unlawful discrimination.14 The Tribunal’s reasoning on this point was described by the High Court on appeal as “unassailable”.15 [38] Part 2 of the HRA does not confer a universal right to be free from discrimination. Rather, it only provides protection against discrimination in certain areas of activity such as in employment,16...

2. OIA-120295.pdf [pdf, 834 KB]

   ...$4,522 $5,200 2024 Criminal Assessment - alcohol and/or drug Auckland District Court 1 $417 $480 2024 Criminal Assessment - alcohol and/or drug Christchurch District Court 2 $5,400 $6,210 2024 Criminal Assessment - alcohol and/or drug Court of Appeal of New Zealand 1 $80 $92 2024 Criminal Assessment - alcohol and/or drug Gisborne District Court 1 $1,200 $1,380 2024 Criminal Assessment - alcohol and/or drug Hamilton - Parole 1 $1,500 $1,725 2024 Criminal Assessment - alcohol and/or d...

3. [2025] NZIACDT 24 - INZ v Ma (31 March 2025) [pdf, 131 KB]

   ...in a professional and diligent manner in failing to retain and provide to the Authority a record of written communications, in breach of cl 1 of the Code. 9 MM v Ma [2024] NZIACDT 10 (12 March 2024) at [43]. 10 Upheld by the District Court on appeal; Ma v [deleted] [2025] NZDC 1128. 11 EM v Ma [2024] NZIACDT 25. 10 2. Failed to obtain the client’s instructions before proceeding with the visa application, in breach of cl 2(e). 3. Failed to provide to the client evidence...

4. [2024] NZIACDT 29 INZ v Li (6 December 2024) [pdf, 253 KB]

   ...visa application process and employment. She simply passed information to the agent (OK). She did not have any contact details for the client. The client had said the same. He had been served with a deportation liability notice which he had appealed. [23] The Authority wrote to Ms Li on 29 May 2024 setting out the particulars of the complaint and seeking an explanation. Explanation from the adviser [24] Ms Li sent an explanation to the Authority on 9 June 2024. She expressed...

5. Housing Corporation of New Zealand v Trustees of housing 1B3B2A– Waimanoni 1B3B2A (1996) 19 Kaitaia MB 227 (19 KT 227) [pdf, 3.5 MB]

   ...position. In the absence of any such self-regulation the legal position will, of course, apply between those immediate parties too." The relevance of this portion of the judgment as submitted by Mr Stewart was that in the Lockwood case the Court of Appeal was considering the rights of a third party whereas in this instance no third party was involved. Counsel supported the statement made by Tipping J, that the purely visual approach need not necessarily apply and that the parties in...

6. Bloor v Ellis - Tapapa 3B1 and others (2025)120 Tākitimu MB 224 (120 TTK 224) [pdf, 277 KB]

   ...[18] The leading case on how s 241 of the Act should be applied is Larkins v Kaitaia – Waihou Hutoia D2A Block.1 It confirms the following approach: 2 1 Larkins v Kaitaia – Waihou Hutoia D2A Block [2013] Māori Appellate Court MB 159 (2013 APPEAL 159). 2 See also Rata – Te Rongoroa A7 Block (1991) Aotea Appellate MB 223 (13 APWG 228) at 244; Morgan – Tautuku Block XIII Section 5 and Section 13 (1998) 83 South Island MB 290 (83 SI 290) at 296; Lake v Taylor – Ngarara We...

7. Canterbury Westland Standards Committee No. 1 v Grave [2016] NZLCDT 8 [pdf, 62 KB]

   ...to our decisions in similar cases such as Hart5 and Eichelbaum.6 [43] The application for permanent name suppression is declined however, as signalled to Mr Grave, the interim name suppression order will remain in place until the expiry of the appeal period in this matter. Referral to Registrar General of Lands [44] The Standards Committee has asked the Tribunal to make a comment as to whether this matter ought to be referred to the Registrar General, a matter which might impa...

8. Auckland Standards Committee 2 v Horsley [2018] NZLCDT 22 [pdf, 194 KB]

   ...something is a different flavour, and whether the flavour has become a poison, can only be determined in a particular case by the familiar techniques of close analysis of the facts, and the commonsense application of judgment.” [28] The Court of Appeal has confirmed that a practitioner cannot properly discharge his or her “duties to one whose interests are in opposition to those of another client”.3 2 Taylor v Schofield Peterson [1999]...

9. Hawkes Bay Standards Committee v M [2013] NZLCDT 1 [pdf, 172 KB]

   ...There were some other grounds cited,2 but the two matters noted above are at the heart of the application for dismissal, on the basis that it would be unfair and a 1 For example see the Court of Appeal in McMenamin v Attorney General [1985] 2 NZLR 274; and Chow v Canterbury District Law Society [2006] NZAR 160 at [15]; and the Tribunal’s power under s 252 Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006. 2 Mr M also alleges “suspicion and goss...

10. February 2016 National Pānui [pdf, 309 KB]

    Contents: Applications for hearing in FEBRUARY | HUI-TANGURU 2016: ISSN 1175 - 8120 (Print) ISSN 2463-3763 (Online) www.mäorilandcourt.govt.nz www.mäorilandonline.govt.nz FEBRUARY | HUI-TANGURU 2016 The purpose of the National Pänui / Te Pänui ä Motu is to provide notice to interested parties of hearings being conducted in, and applications received by, the Mäori Land Court. Only applications and sittings that were confi rmed at the time of this publication are listed. For more