Search Results

1. IV v DD & Ors LCRO 272/2012 (1 March 2016) [pdf, 81 KB]

   ...Penalty [62] The Standards Committee censured Mr IV, imposed a fine of $500, ordered him to pay costs of $500 and to reduce his fees to $9,500 plus GST. I will address each of these. Censure [63] A censure has been described by the Court of Appeal as:18 a formal or official statement rebuking a practitioner for his or her unsatisfactory conduct. A censure or reprimand, however expressed, is likely to be of particular significance in this context because it will be taken into accou...

2. AG v ZQ LCRO 204/2011 (14 February 2014) [pdf, 102 KB]

   ...allegation of breach of equitable duty. The Court had the benefit of examining all of the evidence, and the cross examination of the evidence. If the Complainant disagreed with the Court’s judgment, the proper step would have been to seek an appeal. It is not appropriate to revisit this matter again here. [27] A fifth matter alleged that the Practitioner had verbally abused the Complainant when he went to his lawyer’s office to sign an agreement. The Complainant explained...

3. Waitangi Tribunal - issue 53 of Te Manutukutuku [pdf, 481 KB]

   ...finishing by June 2002. The Wairarapa and Urewera inquiries will follow a similar track as will any new inquiries as they come on stream. In the meantime, the northern South Island inquiry awaits a hearing on procedural matters in the Court of Appeal before it can recommence its progress. The cen- tral North Island districts of Rotorua, Taupo, and Kaingaroa are being readied for hearing in an intensive research process. Other districts such as the King Country, Whanganui and the East...

4. Lee v Mangapapa B2 Incorporation - Mangapapa B2 (2017) 140 Waikato Maniapoto MB 83 (140 WMN 83) [pdf, 222 KB]

   ...to the plaintiff should compensate the plaintiff. 5 4 Adlam v Savage - Lot 39A Sec 2A Parish of Matata and Lot 39A Sec 2B No 2B No 2A Parish of Matata [2015] Māori Appellate Court MB 59 (2015 APPEAL 59). 5 Day v Mead [1987] 2 NZLR 443, at 463-464. 140 Waikato Maniapoto MB 95 [50] The key matters to take into account in relation to the commencement date for interest are: a) There is no fixed rule; 6 b) Generally justi...

5. [2018] NZEmpC 98 Ovation NZ Ltd v The NZ Meat Workers and Related Trades Union [pdf, 343 KB]

   ...claim. [16] This distinction will need to be considered with reference to the question of whether the documents which are sought are or are not “relevant’ in the legal sense. This term is defined in reg 38, which was discussed by the Court of Appeal in ASB Bank Ltd v Nel when it said:7 The test for disclosure under reg 38 of the Employment Court Regulations 2000 is broad and based on the Peruvian Guano test ... The wording of the regulation is wide and includes documents tha...

6. Bradley v Jones - Miria Pene [2016] Chief Judge's MB 907 (2016 CJ 907) [pdf, 414 KB]

   ...evidence 6 he stated that his mother known as Miria Pene or Miria Jones or Miria Ropitini or Miria Hansey who had died around 1942. At a subsequent 2 [2010] Māori Appellate Court MB 167 (2010 APPEAL 167) 3 [2009] Chief Judge’s MB 209-225 (2009 CJ 209) 4 60 Rotorua MB 360-361 dated 10/07/1914 5 147 Rotorua MB 118-120 dated 12/08/1969 6 71 Wairoa MB 49 dated 14/02/1967 2016 Chief Judge’s MB 918 hearing 7 Pokia...

7. Kokiri v Hori - Tahae Kunikuni Pekapeka Roberts and Te Tahi Francis Te Tapua Te Amo Roberts Whanau Trust (2016) 36 Te Waipounamu MB 151 (36 TWP 151) [pdf, 216 KB]

   ...http://www.lexisnexis.com/nz/legal/search/enhRunRemoteLink.do?ersKey=23_T22319040467&backKey=20_T22319040468&homeCsi=274497&A=0.7328021198251591&urlEnc=ISO-8859-1&&dpsi=0069&remotekey1=REFPTID&refpt=1993A4S4:COURT&service=DOC-ID&origdpsi=0069 36 Te Waipounamu MB 162 (b) exercise its powers under section 244; or (c) terminate the trust if the Court is satisfied that there is a sufficient degree of support for termination among the beneficia...

8. CAC v Hughes and Hape, CAC v Hughes and Lal [2016] NZREADT 57 [pdf, 336 KB]

   ...suspended for 10 months from the date of this decision, pursuant to s 110(2)(c). (c) Mr Hape is fined $3,500. He is censured. He is ordered to undergo training as set out above at para [33]. [36] The Tribunal draws to the parties’ attention the appeal provisions of s 116 of the Real Estate Agents Act 2008. ____________________ Ms K Davenport QC Chairperson ____________________ Ms N Dangen Member ____________________ Mr G Denley Me...

9. Ketu - Estate of Te Ringahuia Rangitakatu [2018] Chief Judge's MB 237 (2018 CJ 237) [pdf, 380 KB]

   ...succession order dated 14 October 1955 at 33 Tokaanu MB 251-252 to identify that the interests of the deceased in Tokaanu B2C4B No 2A be vested in: 3 [2010] Māori Appellate Court MB 167 (2010 APPEAL 167) 4 [2009] Chief Judge’s MB 209-225 (2009 CJ 209) 2018 Chief Judge’s MB 249 Tame Ketu for life Albert te Rangiwhakaarahia Ketu Hori Rihia te Wairata alias Hori Rihia No. 2 Te Iria Ida Kaipara...

10. [2020] NZEmpC 194 Samuels v Employment Relations Authority [pdf, 268 KB]

    ...Reuters, Wellington, 2014) at [2.25.1]. 20 There are, however, some material differences between the Tribunal and the Authority. The Tribunal is not required to give effect to strict legal rights, obligations, forms or technicalities. The right to appeal a decision of the Tribunal is limited to the grounds that the manner in which the proceeding was carried out was unfair to the appellant and prejudicially affected the result of the proceedings. of the case, and to chart...