Search Results

1. 2017 to 2022 Ministry of Justice statement of intent [pdf, 1.4 MB]

   ...indicators we use to assess progress towards our strategic intentions are set out in How we measure our performance. 8 We deliver court and tribunal services. We work with the Judiciary to deliver court services for the Supreme Court, Court of Appeal, High Court, District Court, the Environment Court, Employment Court, Māori Land Court and Waitangi Tribunal. We support other tribunals, authorities and committees (including the Disputes Tribunal, Tenancy Tribunal and Coronial Services)...

2. E74 Dr Malcolm Patterson - EIC - Ngāti Whātua Orākei [pdf, 2 MB]

   ...reduced by 1854 to the 700-acre Ōrākei Block — the hapū had functionally become Ngāti Whātua o Ōrākei (as they are known today). By1951, despite at least eight actions in the Māori Land Court, four in the Supreme Court, two in the Court of Appeal, two in the Compensation Court, six appearances before Commissions or Committees of Inquiry and 15 petitions to Parliament seeking the restoration of tribal ownership of their land, the quarter acre cemetery at Ōkahu Bay was all th...

3. [2020] NZEnvC 154 Cable Bay Wine Limited v Auckland Council [pdf, 2.1 MB]

   ...ENVIRONMENT COURT I MUA I TE KOOTI TAIAO O AOTEAROA Court: Consideration: Appearances: Date of Decision: Date of Issue: A: IN THE MATTER AND BETWEEN AND Decision No. [2020] NZEnvC l 5't- of the Resource Management Act 1991 of an appeal pursuant to s120 of the Act CABLE BAY WINE LIMITED & MOTUKAHA INVESTMENTS LIMITED (ENV-2018-AKL-000010) Appellants AUCKLAND COUNCIL Respondent Alternate Environment Judge L J Newhook Commissioner I M Buchanan Co...

4. Ngati Pahauwera Report of Independent Assessor December 2015 [pdf, 1.4 MB]

   ...and “periodically” are of interest. But in any event matters of interpretation have been conclusively determined by the Supreme Court in Paki v Attorney General [2012] NZSC 50. Taking a different view from both the High Court and the Court of Appeal, the Supreme Court held that the definition of “navigable river” did not necessarily extend to the entire river or to those places which were in fact navigable. Thus a section of the Waikato River, which was not and never had been navi...

5. Wickliffe v Pearce - Paengaroa North B4B and K Aggregated (2005) 289 Rotorua MB 236 (289 ROT 236) [pdf, 5.9 MB]

   ..."244 Varialioll of Trust The Caliri may al allY lillie. ill respecl oj any lrusl 10 which Ihis (Pari) applies. vary the terms of the trust by making a new trust order ill substitution/or the existing trust order ... " Case law The Court of Appeal has underscored the broad powers of the Maori Land Court in respect of trusts in the important judgment The Proprielors oj Mallgakillo Towllship v The Maori Land Court & Allor (CA65/99, 16 June 1999. Wellington). In the decision...

6. Trustees of Oparau No 1 Block Trust - Oparau No 1 and Pirongia West 1 2B3D (2004) 109 Waikato MB 300 (109 W 300) [pdf, 1.7 MB]

   ...to section 129B of the Property Law Act. and that the same prindples used under that Act should therefore be applied by the Maori Land Court. Counsel referred to Jacobsen Holdings Limited v Drexel [1986] 1 NZLR 324. In that case the Court of Appeal held that, while the Court is not bound to award compensation, it would usually be equitable between the parties to do so. The compensation would be assessed an the footing of what a willing Minute Book: 109 W 309 grantor and gran...

7. [2020] NZEnvC 134 Lindis Catchment Group Incorporated v Otago Regional Council [pdf, 566 KB]

   ...that this means that neither LCG (nor the court) can safely predict what the future commencement date for the consents should be under section 116(4). All we know is that they must be exercised within five years of 1 October 2021 (assuming the appeals to the High Court are determined before then). For this reason, LCG submits that the best course of action is for provision to be made within each permit to manage the transition process13. That is the basis on which the draft permits...

8. McGregor v Jensen [pdf, 89 KB]

   WEATHERTIGHT HOMES TRIBUNAL CLAIM NO. TRI 2008-100-94 BETWEEN JOAN McGREGOR, DAVID GRAHAM SMITH & JOHN PHILLIPS Claimants AND WILLIAM RAYMOND JOHN JENSEN (Bankrupt and therefore Removed) First Respondents AND ANDRE SCOTT KEMP-UPTON (Removed 16 October 2008) Second Respondent AND AUCKLAND CITY COUNCIL Third Respondent AND ROLLO ROOFING LIMITED (Removed 29 November 2007) Fourth Respondent AND MASTERBUIL

9. [2020] NZEnvC 107 Whangarei District Council v Sustainable Solvents Group Limited [pdf, 1.5 MB]

   ...commencement of Level 3. Costs principles [12] The parties have cited in some detail, legal principles surrounding costs which are largely not in dispute. The general principles have been summarized by Judge Dwyer and affirmed by the Court of Appeal in Walmsley v Aitchison.3 [13] Judge Dwyer correctly identified the relevant principles as follows: [19] section 285 is couched in broad terms and bestows a wide discretion on the Court. It is well recognised that the discretion must b...

10. [2021] NZEmpC 146 Gafiatullina v Propellerhead Ltd [pdf, 394 KB]

    ...consult with the employee on the reasonableness of redeployment in the circumstances. An employer’s assessment of suitability for redeployment is not to be conducted unilaterally outside of the restructure consultation. [112] The Court of Appeal has previously said that, in some circumstances, the failure to consider redeployment opportunities may cast doubt on the genuineness of a redundancy and its timing.20 [113] Ms Gafiatullina says there were a number of viable redeploymen...