Search Results

1. NM & WM v CL & ES [2024] NZDT 896 (20 December 2024) [pdf, 295 KB]

   ...you are applying outside of the 20 working day timeframe, you must also fill out an Application for Rehearing Out of Time. PLEASE NOTE: A rehearing will not be granted just because you disagree with the decision. Please also note that you cannot appeal a rehearing outcome, only the original decision itself. As a result, any appeal filed at the conclusion of the rehearing process would be out of time, involves a further application for leave to appeal and is at risk of not being accept...

2. B Ltd v NK & KX [2025] NZDT 28 (27 January 2025) [pdf, 177 KB]

   ...you are applying outside of the 20 working day timeframe, you must also fill out an Application for Rehearing Out of Time. PLEASE NOTE: A rehearing will not be granted just because you disagree with the decision. Please also note that you cannot appeal a rehearing outcome, only the original decision itself. As a result, any appeal filed at the conclusion of the rehearing process would be out of time, involves a further application for leave to appeal and is at risk of not being accept...

3. Tweeddale v Pearson [2010] NZWHT Wellington 4 [pdf, 230 KB]

   ...................................................................................................... 14 3 Costs [1] A determination was made on 1 December 2009 dealing with the substantive issues between the parties. [2] The fifth respondent has appealed against the decision. [3] Applications for costs have been received from the third and sixth respondents. [4] Generally the Tribunal awaits the outcome of any appeals before dealing with costs. However, in this m...

4. Combined jurisdiction legal aid form submissions and decisions [pdf, 984 KB]

   ...circumstances. We disagree. We consider that the current question prompts the applicant to provide any other details that are relevant to their financial situation. Criminal charges The lawyer of choice question is ‘hidden’ below the ‘Appeal legal aid only’ heading, meaning that customers may miss this question. We agree and the question is now underneath the question asking where the case will be heard. 5 Your comments Our responses The a...

5. Lee & Hwang v CAC 404 & Ors [2016] NZREADT 76 [pdf, 158 KB]

   BEFORE THE REAL ESTATE AGENTS DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL [2016] NZREADT 76 READT 031/15 UNDER THE REAL ESTATE AGENTS ACT 2008 IN THE MATTER OF AN APPEAL UNDER SECTION 111 OF THE ACT BETWEEN PHILIP LEE and HYUN SIM HWANG Appellants AND THE REAL ESTATE AGENTS AUTHORITY (CAC 404) First respondent AND HYUN (Mario) PARK, WON OK (Grace) OH Second respondents Hearing: Auckland, 25 October 2016 Tribunal: Ms KG Davenport QC, Chai...

6. [2020] NZEnvC 200 Wilkins v Southland Regional Council [pdf, 381 KB]

   BEFORE THE ENVIRONMENT COURT AT CHRISTCHURCH I MUA I TE KOTI TAIAO O AOTEAROA Kl OTAUTAHI IN THE MATTER AND BETWEEN AND Decision No. [2020] NZEnvC 200 of the Resource Management Act 1991 of an appeal under s 120 of the Act WILKINS FARMING CO LIMITED (ENV-2018-AKL-380) Appellant SOUTHLAND REGIONAL COUNCIL Respondent Court: Environment Judge J E Borthwick Hearing: In Chambers at Christchurch Date of Decision: 3 December 2020 Date of Issue: 3 December 2020 DEC...

7. [2021] NZEnvC 073 Smith v Young [pdf, 782 KB]

   ...Decision No. [2021] NZEnvC 73 of the Resource 1\tfanagement Act 1991 an application for an enforcement order under s 316 of the Act i\HCHAEL & EMILY SMITH (ENV-2018-CHC-191) Applicants KARL & GINA YOUNG First Respondents an appeal under s120 of the Act MICHl-\EL & EMILY SMITH (ENV-2018-CHC-197) Appellants NELSON CIT Y COUNCIL Respondent KARL YOUNG Applicant EnvironmentJudgeJ J M Hassan Sitting alone under s279 of the Act Hearing: Last case e...

8. [2020] NZREADT 10 - Kettle (10 March 2020) [pdf, 155 KB]

   BEFORE THE REAL ESTATE AGENTS DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL [2020] NZREADT 10 READT 040/19 IN THE MATTER OF An appeal under section 111 of the Real Estate Agents Act 2008 BETWEEN JOHN KETTLE Appellant AND THE REAL ESTATE AGENTS AUTHORITY (CAC 521) First Respondent AND SAMUEL PETERS Second Respondent Hearing: 3 March 2020, at Wellington Tribunal: Hon P J Andrews, Chairperson Mr G Denley, Member Ms C Sandelin, Memb...

9. Auckland Standards Committee 3 v Potter [2022] NZLCDT 27 (27 July 2022) [pdf, 110 KB]

   ...somewhat haphazard as to salary, hours and location. Mr Potter seems to have been absent from Auckland frequently. Mr Potter was contemporaneously running a repiling business. [6] Mr Potter advised the client in relation to a relationship property appeal to the High Court. This work was somewhat informal. It precedes the matters which gave rise to the discrete charges, but it is relevant to understanding the relationship between Mr Potter and the client. The work that gave rise...

10. [2022] NZACC 5 – Estate of Raymond Morris v ACC (18 January 2022) [pdf, 182 KB]

    IN THE DISTRICT COURT AT WELLINGTON I TE KŌTI-Ā-ROHE KI TE WHANGANUI-A-TARA [2022] NZACC 005 ACR 191/20 UNDER THE ACCIDENT COMPENSATION ACT 2001 IN THE MATTER OF AN APPEAL UNDER SECTION 149 OF THE ACT BETWEEN ESTATE OF RAYMOND MORRIS Appellant AND ACCIDENT COMPENSATION CORPORATION Respondent Hearing: On the papers Held at: Auckland/Tāmaki Makaurau Appearances: The appellant was self-represented when the appeal was lodged L...