Search Results

1. CAC306 v Zhou & Anor [2015] NZREADT 51 [pdf, 223 KB]

   ...penalty. We direct the Registrar to arrange a Directions Hearing between our Chairperson and the parties to timetable dealing with penalty in the usual way. [51] 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...

2. Rogers v Hauraki – Te Aute A1B (2015) 117 Taitokerau MB 87 (117 TTK 87) [pdf, 222 KB]

   ...provides that every order of the Court affecting title to Māori land binds all persons with an interest in the land. Further, s 77 of the Act is to the effect that an order affecting Māori land is conclusive after 10 years. There has not been any appeal or other challenge to the roadway order since it was made in 1988. I must therefore proceed on the basis that the roadway order is valid. Nevertheless, I do note in relation to the issue of notice to the owners in 1988 that, at...

3. [2013] NZEmpC 117 Morgan v Whanganui College Board of Trustees [pdf, 163 KB]

   ...7 (1992) 5 PRNZ 447. 8 (1996) 9 PRNZ 164. 9 At [38]. [33] Further, Judge Couch found that the conclusion in the City Realties case was inconsistent with a judgment of the Court of Appeal in D F Hammond Land Holdings Ltd v Elders Pastoral Ltd 10 where Hardie Boys J said: 11 The privilege attached to “without prejudice” communications is based to a large degree on considerations of public policy. It is intended t

4. CAC10056 v Ferguson [2013] NZREADT 5 [pdf, 83 KB]

   ...If the Defendant declines to make submissions on penalty or rests on written submissions we shall deal with that issue when and as we think appropriate. [58] 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 J Robson Member ______________________________ Mr J Ga...

5. Martin - Lot 2 Deposited Plan South Auckland 26130 (2013) 59 Waikato-Maniapoto MB 154 (59 WMN 154) [pdf, 135 KB]

   ...to sell. Court: Well how does the status of the land being Māori freehold land affect your plans? Marie Martin: Because it would be... you can’t really sell Māori freehold land. [33] I take into account the comments made by the Court of Appeal in Valuer-General v Mangatu Inc.9 I accept as a general proposition that if land has Māori freehold status it will have a lower market valuation than if it was general land. I also acknowledge that there are restrictions on alienat...

6. Wellington Standards Committee v Hirschfeld [2014] NZLCDT 48 [pdf, 144 KB]

   ...[78] In relation to the Comeskey decision Mr Harrison again submitted that this ought to be distinguished (nine months suspension having been imposed) on the basis that there were other serious misconduct charges, such as misleading the Court of Appeal and failures to a client. [79] In Mr Hirschfeld’s case, Mr Harrison emphasised, only one aspect of his practice, that is his invoicing, was under scrutiny. 14 See footnote 9. 15 See...

7. CAC20005 v Peng [2015] NZREADT 4 [pdf, 227 KB]

   ...offence under the Act or its Rules in the context in which she found herself. [79] Accordingly, all the above charges are hereby dismissed. 15 [80] 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 G Denley Member _____________________ Ms N Dangen Member...

8. [2015] NZEmpC 99 NZ Meat Workers Union Inc v South Pacific Meats Ltd [pdf, 249 KB]

   ...damage – not only to the applicant but also affected non-parties. Although an ability to challenge the refusal of a non- publication order at an interlocutory stage may disrupt unfinished Authority business, in the sense identified by the Court of Appeal in Rawlings, its distinguishing characteristic is that it is not the sort of determination that can subsequently be remedied on a challenge or by way of review. The horse will have well and truly bolted by that stage. [26] A refus...

9. TG v Standards Committee LCRO 205/2014 (30 June 2014) [pdf, 359 KB]

   ...has broad powers to conduct her own investigations, including the power to exercise for that purpose all the powers of a standards committee or an investigator, and seek and receive evidence. The statutory power of review is much broader than an appeal, and gives the LCRO discretion as to the approach to be taken on any particular review and the extent of the investigations necessary to conduct that review. Review Hearing [28] Mr TG attended a review hearing in [City] on 10 June...

10. MC & Ors v ND LCRO 377/2013 (13 October 2014) [pdf, 86 KB]

    ...2 Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008. 3 Above n 1 at [62]. 4 aspect of an inquiry by a Standards Committee and its determination. In Deliu v Hong 4 The power of review is much broader than an appeal. It gives the Review Officer discretion as to the approach to be taken on any particular review as to the extent of the investigations necessary to conduct that review, and therefore clearly contemplates the Review Officer reaching his or...