Search Results

1. GL v TT & LT [2022] NZDT 249 (7 December 2022) [pdf, 244 KB]

   ...having been made. If 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. Grounds for Appeal There are very limited grounds for appealing a decision of the Tribunal. Specifically, the Referee conducted the proceedings (or a Tribunal investigator carried out an enquiry) in a way that was unfair and prejudiced the result of the...

2. N Ltd v SQ & TQ [2023] NZDT 314 (25 July 2023) [pdf, 182 KB]

   ...having been made. If 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. Grounds for Appeal There are very limited grounds for appealing a decision of the Tribunal. Specifically, the Referee conducted the proceedings (or a Tribunal investigator carried out an enquiry) in a way that was unfair and prejudiced the result of the...

3. Ward v Accident Compensation Corporation (Revocation of deemed cover) [2024] NZACC 173 (31 October 2024) [pdf, 177 KB]

   IN THE DISTRICT COURT AT WELLINGTON I TE KŌTI-Ā-ROHE KI TE WHANGANUI-A-TARA [2024] NZACC 173 ACAR 190/23 UNDER THE ACCIDENT COMPENSATION ACT 2001 IN THE MATTER OF AN APPEAL UNDER SECTION 149 OF THE ACT BETWEEN MICHAEL WARD Appellant AND ACCIDENT COMPENSATION CORPORATION Respondent Hearing: 10 September 2024 Held at: Auckland/Tāmaki Makaurau Appearances: M Dixon-McIver for the Appellant K Anderson KC for the Corporation Judgme...

4. [2024] NZEnvC 239 Christchurch International Airport Limited v Selwyn District Council [pdf, 342 KB]

   CIAL v SDC – CONSENT ORDER IN THE ENVIRONMENT COURT AT CHRISTCHURCH I TE KŌTI TAIAO O AOTEAROA KI ŌTAUTAHI Decision No. [2024] NZEnvC 239 IN THE MATTER of the Resource Management Act 1991 AND an appeal under clause 14 of the First Schedule of the Act BETWEEN CHRISTCHURCH INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LIMITED (ENV-2023-CHC-120) Appellant AND SELWYN DISTRICT COUNCIL Respondent Environment Judge P A Steven – sitting alone under s279 of the Act In Chambers at Christchur...

5. [2010] NZEmpC 32 Maritime Union of NZ v Ports of Auckland [pdf, 100 KB]

   ...the Act which addresses compliance orders of the sort that the plaintiff claims as remedies in all causes of action. Although s 137 addresses the powers of the Employment Relations Authority, those are exercisable by this Court on a challenge (appeal) following the judgment of this Court in Norske Skog Tasman Limited v Manufacturing & Construction Workers Union Inc.2 [10] Section 137(1) applies “where any person has not observed or complied with …” Part 6 of the Act (in...

6. LCRO 21-2017 AJ v AK [pdf, 298 KB]

   ...for your time at your hourly rate:- • Hearing required caused by me/our actions or omissions: Any Court hearing required because of my/our actions or omissions; • Hearing of issues not disclosed by me/us to you: Any Court hearing. • Any Appeals Excluded: This engagement excludes any appeal should you wish to appeal and such appear will be a totally separate matter which I will discuss with you if you are unhappy with the judgment/decision as issued by the Judge. [54] Neithe...

7. BORA Evidence Bill [pdf, 406 KB]

   ...that is improperly obtained, including evidence obtained as a result of a breach of the BORA. In part, clause 26 represents an attempt to codify the principles relating to exclusion of evidence that can be elucidated from the decision of the Court of Appeal in R v Shaheed. The test incorporates a significant degree of flexibility as well as discretion of the judge to ensure that the law can continue to be developed and applied consistently with the BORA. In particular: 6.1 In undertaking...

8. Auckland Standards Committee 1 v Hart [2012] NZLCDT 20 [pdf, 455 KB]

   ...sums sought from Mr A’s family occurred in three stages. On the first day of meeting a sum of $10,000 was sought and paid the following day prior to a Court appearance which was to seek interim name suppression and to file a standard form bail appeal. That was 14 November 2008. The family were asked to pay a further $15,000 on 19 November 2008, in advance of the bail appeal hearing, and finally, on 15 December 2008 prior to a District Court appearance to seek electronically mon...

9. ENV-2016-AKL-000204 Davies Kahlberg Family Trust v Auckland Council [pdf, 3 MB]

   ...BETWEEN AND Dairy Flat 0792 jimdavies@xtra.co.nz Mob 0274 943143 LEB-423066-11-174-V1:j d ENV -2016-AKL- of the Local Government (Auckland Transitional Provisions) Act 2010 (LGATPA) and the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) of an appeal under section 156(1) 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 (Proposed Plan) of Proposed...

10. Tau v Tahere - Rangihamama X3A (2016) 137 Taitokerau MB 68 (137 TTK 68) [pdf, 494 KB]

    ...[31] Mr Brown did not clarify the type of bias that is alleged in this case. Despite that, it is clear from Mr Brown’s submission that the Tahere whānau are alleging apparent bias. [32] In Muir v Commissioner of Inland Revenue, the Court of Appeal held that the test for determining apparent bias is as follows: 15 In our view, the correct inquiry is a two stage one. First, it is necessary to establish the actual circumstances which have a direct bearing on a suggestion that the...