Search Results

1. January 2015 Outstanding applications [pdf, 253 KB]

   ...Makete - and succession orders made at 64 Waiariki MB 252-257 dated 15/10/2012 - Application to the Chief Judge A20140008837 58/93 Arthur Thorpe Gemmell Mohaka A4 Trust - and an order for costs made at 32 Takitimu MB 174-183 dated 7 July 2014 - Appeal A20140008849 45/93 Betty Louisa Regina Haenga Estates of Hana Te Urupa Petiha or Hana Te Urupa Patiki or Haenga; and Makahuri Petiha - and a successio order made at 60 GIS MB 315-322 on 11 March 1963 - Application to the Chi...

2. February 2015 Outstanding applications [pdf, 253 KB]

   ...Makete - and succession orders made at 64 Waiariki MB 252-257 dated 15/10/2012 - Application to the Chief Judge A20140008837 58/93 Arthur Thorpe Gemmell Mohaka A4 Trust - and an order for costs made at 32 Takitimu MB 174-183 dated 7 July 2014 - Appeal A20140008849 45/93 Betty Louisa Regina Haenga Estates of Hana Te Urupa Petiha or Hana Te Urupa Patiki or Haenga; and Makahuri Petiha - and a successio order made at 60 GIS MB 315-322 on 11 March 1963 - Application to the Chi...

3. BORA Aquaculture Reform Bill [pdf, 458 KB]

   ...or the allocation of, authorisations (clause 63(5)). 14. The assets received from the settlement are to be allocated to individual iwi. While the Bill does not define an iwi aquaculture organisation in overtly racial or ethnic terms, the Court of Appeal in Te Waka Hi Ika o Te Arawa v Treaty of Waitangi Fisheries Commission was unanimous in finding that the word “iwi” meant tribe or group of hapu and that a traditional tribe was a group of Māori people claiming descent from a common...

4. Apaapa - Te Pura No 17 Block (2010) 6 Waikato Maniapoto MB 1 (6 WMN 1) [pdf, 207 KB]

   ...sufficient proportion of the owners agree to it.‖ [40] The general principles applicable to a change of status have developed over time. There are a number of decisions of the Māori Land Court, Māori Appellate Court, High Court and Court of Appeal which are of relevance. They are Cleave – Orokawa 3B (1995) 4 Taitokerau Appellate MB 95 (4 APWH 95); White – Maketu A2A Lot 4 DPS 63036 (1999) 1 Waiariki Appellate MB 116 (1 AP 116); Hoko – Papamoa 2A1 (2003) 20 Waikato-Maniap...

5. WHT - glossary [pdf, 685 KB]

   ...an abatement notice in that everybody (not just the council) can apply for an enforcement order against someone else. These are issued by the Environment Court rather than the council. Environment Court: A specialist Court where people can go to appeal decisions made by councils on a policy statement, plan or resource consent application, or to apply for an enforcement order. Equity: An owner’s financial interest in a property being the difference between the fair market value of...

6. Fehling v Appleby [2014] NZHRRT 24 [pdf, 94 KB]

   ...Privacy Act. Those members were the Chairperson, RPG Haines QC, Ms J Grant, Member and Ms S Scott, Member. The application was dismissed in Fehling v Appleby (Recusal Application) [2014] NZHRRT 11 (17 March 2014). Neither decision was challenged on appeal. [7] At the commencement of the hearing Mr Fehling made two applications: [7.1] First, that the Tribunal address certain further issues under the Insolvency Act, particularly in relation to the remedies the Tribunal can award agains...

7. Auckland Standards Committee 3 v PL [2016] NZLCDT 6 [pdf, 114 KB]

   ...disclose documents to O. He subsequently lied to the WH Tribunal. The truth did not reveal itself until it was discovered after the claim before the WH Tribunal had been determined. [85] We adopt the remarks of Katz J in her decision on I’s appeal from the costs decision of the WH Tribunal which she made at para 57 and which we summarise: (a) Discovery of the documents would likely have seriously undermined the claim before the WH Tribunal; 21 (b) The apartments had been...

8. SW v Standards Committee LCRO 371/2013 (14 September 2015) [pdf, 104 KB]

   ...discretion, it is appropriate for the LCRO to exercise particular caution before substituting his own judgment for that of the Standards Committee, without good reason. [22] In Deliu v Hong it was noted that a review is:1 … 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 hi...

9. AN v DH LCRO 119/2015 (23 December 2015) [pdf, 97 KB]

   ...investigations into lawyers’ conduct, service and costs, 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 [49] Ms AN attended an applicant only review heari...

10. AW v ZK LCRO 230/2012 (28 March 2014) [pdf, 259 KB]

    ...two costs assessors that the fee invoices did not amount to overcharging.9 [16] I am not constrained or limited in the scope of my review by the decision of the Standards Committee. The review jurisdiction of this Office is broader than an appeal and it gives the Review Officer a discretion concerning the approach to be taken on any particular review. The Review Officer must come to his or her own decision.10 Review jurisdiction – complaints concerning fee invoices pre-LCA...