Search Results

1. What happens next

   ...infringing. The maximum amount the tribunal can order the account holder to pay is $15,000. Decisions The tribunal will generally make its decision 'on the papers' based on the written information provided by the parties. All decisions are given in writing. Appeal the tribunal’s decision You can only appeal the tribunal’s decision if you believe it’s wrong in law. An appeal must be lodged with the High Court within 20 working days of you being told the tribunal’s decision. If you do ap...

   Located in:

   1. Tribunals >
   2. Copyright >
   3. File sharing infringements

2. [2009] NZEmpC WC 14/09 NZ Meat Workers & Related Trades Union v AFFCO NZ Ltd [pdf, 57 KB]

   ...collective agreement including, in particular, its remuneration provisions. [25] The plaintiff’s argument is based on an interpretation of the statutory definition of a collective agreement and several statements in recent judgments of the Court of Appeal dealing with allied questions. The defendant’s response is that the trial agreement is not a collective agreement because it fails to meet all the requirements of s54 and, in particular, those in s54(3). Decision [26] The...

3. REAA CAC 10017 v Miller [2014] NZREADT 70 [pdf, 162 KB]

   ...conduct in not disclosing the information was misconduct. More particularly, we held that Mr Miller’s conduct amounted to misconduct under both s.73(a) (disgraceful conduct) and s.73(b) (serious negligence or serious incompetence). [7] Mr Miller appealed to the High Court against our finding of disgraceful conduct under s.73(a), but not against the finding of serious negligence or serious incompetence under s.73(b). The Authority (i.e. the prosecution) ultimately consented to the ap...

4. Munley v CAC 402 & Ors [2016] NZREADT 53 [pdf, 195 KB]

   BEFORE THE REAL ESTATE AGENTS DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL [2016] NZREADT 53 READT 077/15 IN THE MATTER OF an appeal under s111 of the Real Estate Agents Act 2008 BETWEEN MICHAEL ANTHONY MUNLEY Appellant AND THE REAL ESTATE AGENTS AUTHORITY (CAC 402) First respondent AND STEPHANIE KELLAND, STEPHEN WILLIAMS & MEGAN JAFFE REAL ESTATE LTD Second respondents Hearing: 25 July 2016 (in Auckland) Tribunal: Hon P J Andrews (Ch...

5. Ruka - Taheke 23A and 23B [2010] 2010 Maori Appellate Court MB 629 (2010 APPEAL 629) [pdf, 97 KB]

   RUKA MAC 2010 Maori Appellate Court MB 629 23 December 2010 IN THE MAORI APPELLATE COURT OF NEW ZEALAND TAITOKERAU DISTRICT 2010 Maori Appellate Court MB 629 (2010 APPEAL 629) A20100009428 UNDER Section 58, Te Ture Whenua Maori Act 1993 IN THE MATTER OF An appeal against an order of the Maori Land Court made on 13 May 2010 at 5 Taitokerau MB 186-190 in respect of Taheke 23A and 23B BETWEEN ARTHUR ROBERT REIHANA RUKA Appellant Hearing: 10 No...

6. Brill v Real Estate Agents Authority (CAC 409) & Ors [2017] NZREADT 28 [pdf, 237 KB]

   BEFORE THE REAL ESTATE AGENTS DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL [2017] NZREADT 28 READT 036/16 IN THE MATTER OF An appeal under section 111 of the Real Estate Agents Act 2008 BETWEEN JEFFREY BRILL Appellant AND THE REAL ESTATE AGENTS AUTHORITY (CAC 409) First Respondent AND BRIAN DIXON and JUDITH ARNOLD Second Respondents On the papers Tribunal: Hon P J Andrews, Chairperson Mr J Gaukrodger, Member Ms N Dangen, Member...

7. [2022] NZACC 177 — Calzadilla v ACC (19 September 2022) [pdf, 255 KB]

   IN THE DISTRICT COURT AT WELLINGTON I TE KŌTI-Ā-ROHE KI TE WHANGANUI-A-TARA [2022] NZACC 177 ACR 212/20 UNDER THE ACCIDENT COMPENSATION ACT 2001 IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL UNDER SECTION 162(1) OF THE ACT BETWEEN VIOLETA CALZADILLA Applicant AND ACCIDENT COMPENSATION CORPORATION Respondent Submissions: J Opie for Ms Calzadilla S Kinsler and E Watt for the Respondent Hearing: On the papers Judg...

8. Nottingham v Accident Compensation Corporation (Social Rehabilitation) [2022] NZACC 212 [pdf, 214 KB]

   IN THE DISTRICT COURT AT WELLINGTON I TE KŌTI-Ā-ROHE KI TE WHANGANUI-A-TARA [2022] NZACC 212 ACR 63/22 UNDER THE ACCIDENT COMPENSATION ACT 2001 IN THE MATTER OF AN APPEAL UNDER SECTION 149 OF THE ACT BETWEEN DERMOT NOTTINGHAM Appellant AND ACCIDENT COMPENSATION CORPORATION Respondent Hearing: 14 November 2022 Held at: Hamilton/Kirikirioa Appearances: The Appellant is self-represented J Sumner for the respondent Judgment...

9. Samuela v ACC (Weekly compensation) [2024] NZACC 70 [pdf, 185 KB]

   IN THE DISTRICT COURT AT WELLINGTON I TE KŌTI-Ā-ROHE KI TE WHANGANUI-A-TARA [2024] NZACC 070 ACAR 217/22 UNDER THE ACCIDENT COMPENSATION ACT 2001 IN THE MATTER OF AN APPEAL UNDER SECTION 149 OF THE ACT BETWEEN SONNY SAMUELA Appellant AND ACCIDENT COMPENSATION CORPORATION Respondent Hearing: 15 April 2024 Held at: Auckland District Court Appearances: H Peart and Ms E Manga for the Appellant C Hlavac for the Accident Compensa...

10. [2024] NZREADT 18 - HH v CAC 2201 & SL (19 June 2024) [pdf, 236 KB]

    ...a complaint against the licensee to the Real Estate Agents Authority (the Authority). It was referred to Complaints Assessment Committee 2201 (the Committee) which decided to take no further action. It is from this decision that the purchaser appeals to the Tribunal. [3] In support of his appeal, the purchaser has sought leave to produce new evidence that was not given to the Committee. BACKGROUND [4] The purchaser has been a property investor for about 15 years. He has attende...