14383 items matching your search terms
[2017] NZSSAA 014 Reference No. SSA 125/15 IN THE MATTER of the Social Security Act 1964 AND IN THE MATTER of an appeal by XXXX of Wellington against a decision of a Benefits Review Committee BEFORE THE SOCIAL SECURITY APPEAL AUTHORITY Mr G Pearson - Chairperson Mr C Joe - Member Hearing at Wellington on 5 April 2017 Appearances For Chief Executive of the Ministry of Social Development: Ms R Shaw (agent) For the Appellant: Mr G Howell (a...
...SJE-889273-4-391-V1:al BEFORE THE ENVIRONMENT COURT AT AUCKLAND ENV-2016-AKL- IN THE MATTER of the Local Government (Auckland Transitional Provisions) Act 2010 (LGATPA) and the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) AND IN THE MATTER of an appeal under section 156(1) and section 156(3) of the LGATPA against a decision of the Auckland Council on a recommendation of the Auckland Unitary Plan Independent Hearings Panel (Hearings Panel) on the proposed Auckland Unitary Plan (P...
[2017] NZSSAA 066 Reference No. SSA 074 / 16 IN THE MATTER of the Social Security Act 1964 AND IN THE MATTER of an appeal by XXXX of XXXX against a decision of a Benefits Review Committee BEFORE THE SOCIAL SECURITY APPEAL AUTHORITY S Pezaro - Deputy Chair K Williams - Member Dates of hearing: 17 March 2017; 10 May 2017 Appearances The appellant in person G. Howell, lay representative for the appellant J. Hume for the Chief Executive...
FLEET v ASHBURTON DISTRICT COUNCIL IN THE ENVIRONMENT COURT AT CHRISTCHURCH I TE KŌTI TAIAO O AOTEAROA KI ŌTAUTAHI Decision No. [2023] NZEnvC 264 IN THE MATTER of an appeal under s 358 of the Resource Management Act 1991 BETWEEN TRACY ANN FLEET (ENV-2022-CHC-033) Appellant AND ASHBURTON DISTRICT COUNCIL Respondent Court: Environment Judge L J Semple sitting alone under s 279 of the Act Hearing: at Christchurch on 2 October 2023 Appearances: Ms Fleet in person...
...defendant has submitted that this Tribunal should recuse itself from hearing the charge due to its involvement in a related proceeding, Nottingham and Others v REAA and Honey [2014] NZREADT 80 (our Tribunal proceedings), [2015] NZHC 1616 (High Court appeal), (the Honey appeal). 2 [3] The prosecuting Committee submits that the test for recusal is not made out and that we should proceed to hear the charge. The Application for Recusal [4] The defendant’s application that thi...
...return of those shares. She argued that Thelma and Sam had an arrangement that, once he obtained a house site on the land, the shares would be returned. [2] On 29 March 2018, Deputy Chief Judge Fox dismissed that application.1 Ms Wihongi now appeals that decision and, through her counsel, Messrs Tupara and Hirschfeld, asks that the case be referred back to the Māori Land Court for a rehearing. The issue in this case is whether the appeal should be upheld. [3] The respondents,...
BEFORE THE REAL ESTATE AGENTS DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL [2018] NZREADT 44 READT 047/17 IN THE MATTER OF An appeal under section 111 of the Real Estate Agents Act 2008 BETWEEN MAXWELL VERTONGEN Appellant AND THE REAL ESTATE AGENTS AUTHORITY (CAC 413) First Respondent AND JAMES DUNLOP Second Respondent Hearing: 9 August 2018, at Wellington Tribunal: Mr J Doogue, Deputy Chairperson Mr G Denley, Member Ms N Dangen, Member...
...impracticable or inappropriate to make a direction that the parties mediate. 1 ABC v DEF [2021] NZEmpC 208 at [38]. [3] I reserved costs and directed the parties to discuss this topic in the first instance. Application for leave to appeal [4] ABC subsequently applied to the Court of Appeal for leave to appeal. In a judgment issued on 28 April 2022, the Court of Appeal declined the application for leave.2 [5] The Court of Appeal held that interpretation issues which AB...
...who suffered the loss or damage. 12. In this case, NB was at all times dealing directly and personally with SD – he was one of two directors of the company but appeared to be the only person carrying out work for the company. Furthermore, he appealed to SD on a personal basis for payments to be made before they were due, citing the particular circumstances and needs of his child/ren and family, and I find on the balance of probabilities that he must have known that he had either no...
...decision merges those rights to produce the final outcome of the dispute. This extinguishes the prior rights and bars the parties from re-litigating the outcome.1 10. The reasoning behind the doctrine is that litigation should be final (barring an appeal) and to protect the integrity and efficiency of the justice system. 11. The doctrine prevents a party from bringing a claim once that particular claim has been subjected to a final judgment by a Court or Tribunal of competent juris...