Search Results

1. Copyright Licensing Limited v Universities of NZ [2013] NZCOP 18 [pdf, 213 KB]

   ...leaving the licensing scheme intact in relation to other classes of case. All those in the “classes of cases” or “cases of the description” would by default be bound, yet be unrepresented. [69] He referred to the decision of the Court of Appeal in Audio-Visual Copyright Society Ltd v University of Auckland12 (“the AVCOS case”), in which the issue was whether the Act required the relevant scheme to be accepted by one or more licensees before it could be said to be ...

2. BORA Public Health Bill [pdf, 617 KB]

   ...quarantine issues or emergencies. There are several safeguards attached to the exercise of these powers including, depending on the context, various evidential burdens, the involvement of a Court, requirement to contact and consult family or whānau, and appeal rights. Section 19(1) – Freedom from discrimination 14. Under the Bill, the list of notifiable conditions raises two prima facie issues of inconsistency with the freedom from discrimination. The first is based on the fact that...

3. Whooley - Ngaiotonga 1B1 and 2B1 and Lots 1 - 2, and 3 DP383105 (2014) 71 Taitokerau MB 38 (71 TTK 38) [pdf, 1.1 MB]

   ...Gully), which is the only decision of that Court that touches on sufficiency of support in relation to exchange orders.3 2 Rudolph v Reti – Otetao B3A2 [2011] Māori Appellate Court MB 143 (2011 APPEAL 143) at [40]. 3 Hanford v Māori Trustee – Ohiro 19 & 21 Block 10 (Polhill Gully) (2006) 15 Aotea Appellate MB 218 (15 WGAP 218). 71 Taitokerau MB 48 [37] The leading Māori Appellate Court decision on s 288(2)(b) is Wh...

4. Guest v New Zealand Law Society [2009] NZLCDT 12 [pdf, 390 KB]

   ...of his name to the roll of Barristers and Solicitors of the High Court of New Zealand. Mr Guest was admitted to the Bar and thus entered on the roll on 2 December 1972. He was struck off the roll on 29 July 2002 following the rejection of his appeal to the High Court against a decision of 3 December 2001 of the New Zealand Law Practitioners Disciplinary Tribunal that he be struck off the roll. The onus of proof is on the applicant to be readmitted. APPLICANT’S BACKGROUND...

5. RIS - Control Orders [pdf, 918 KB]

   ...the direct costs fall to government, including costs of administering a control order regime (supervision and monitoring), cost of judicial time in considering the applications and hearing time, and the Crown’s legal costs in the application and appeal processes. There will be ongoing costs of monitoring of the conditions by Police and other agencies, with costs dependant on the types of conditions imposed on the returnee. There may also be some costs associated with reintegration...

6. [2022] NZACC 8 – N v ACC (20 January 2022) [pdf, 303 KB]

   ...DETAILS THAT MIGHT IDENTIFY THE APPELLANT IN THE DISTRICT COURT AT WELLINGTON I TE KŌTI-Ā-ROHE KI TE WHANGANUI-A-TARA [2022] NZACC 008 ACR 037/20 UNDER THE ACCIDENT COMPENSATION ACT 2001 IN THE MATTER OF AN APPEAL UNDER SECTION 149 OF THE ACT BETWEEN N Appellant AND ACCIDENT COMPENSATION CORPORATION Respondent Hearing: 22 November 2021 Heard at: Auckland/Tamaki Makaurau Appearances: B Hinchcliff for the appellant...

7. [2013] NZEmpC 88 Rittson-Thomas t/a Totara Hills Farm v Davidson [pdf, 104 KB]

   ...detail of his actual legal costs to enable an assessment to be made of their reasonableness and, thereby, to determine a contribution to such reasonable costs. This is the longstanding approach to costs’ questions, both directed by the Court of Appeal and followed by the Employment Court in practice. [8] In late November 2012, that is about three months before the hearing, Mr Davidson proposed a settlement of the proceedings for the sum of $6,000. This was rejected by Mr Rittson...

8. Ellis v CAC 10069 & Reedy [2012] NZREADT 63 [pdf, 26 KB]

   ...- Member Ms J Robson - Member APPEARANCES J Donovan, Solicitor for the appellant Mr Clancy/Ms MacGibbon for First Respondent No appearance for Second Respondent HEARD at AUCKLAND on 4 October 2012 Introduction [1] This is an appeal by Mr Ellis against the Complaints Assessment Committee decision of 22 December 2011 and the Penalty Decision dated 16 April 2012. Summary of Complaints [2] The second respondent Dr William Reedy was one of three trustees at a proper...

9. [2014] NZEmpC 102 Yan v Commissioner of Inland Revenue [pdf, 69 KB]

   ...pay and that this amounted to an inability to pay for the purposes of r 5.45(1)(b). She was unable to 2 Although reg 69 of the Employment Court Regulations 2000 relates to security for costs on an appeal to the Court of Appeal. 3 See Polzleitner v WWW Media Ltd [2011] NZEmpC 139 at [6]. 4 As summarised by the Court of Appeal in A S McLachlan Ltd v MEL Network Ltd (2002) 16 PRNZ 747 (CA) at [15]-[16]. point to any authori...

10. Sanquhar v Aberdeenshire LCRO 201 / 2009 (17 February 2010) [pdf, 56 KB]

    ...subject matter of the complaint arose and the date when the complaint was made is such that an investigation of the complaint is no longer practicable or desirable; and [b] there is in all the circumstances an adequate remedy or right of appeal… that it would be reasonable for the person aggrieved to exercise. [6] Subsection 2 provides a more general ground for the exercise of the discretion to take no further action where “it appears to the Standards Committee that, ha...