Search Results

1. Te Korowai Tiaki o Te Hauāuru Incorporated Society v Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Tama Trust (2019) 407 Aotea MB 47 (407 AOT 47) [pdf, 319 KB]

   ...significant decisions before the 18 October 2019 fixture. 1 As recently confirmed by the Māori Appellate Court in Moke v Trustees of Ngāti Tarāwhai Iwi Trust [2019] Māori Appellate Court MB 265 (2019 APPEAL 265). 407 Aotea MB 49 [6] The Trust and Te Korowai filed evidence and submissions in advance of, and made submissions at, the substantive hearing on 18 October 2019. The Trust led three witnesses at the hearing, eac...

2. CEIT Practice Notes 2022 [pdf, 460 KB]

   ...46 Section 41(3). 16 | P a g e The Decision As soon as practical after the hearing, the Tribunal will then give a written decision which sets out the reasons in writing.47 The Tribunal’s decisions are final and binding on the parties, unless appealed. Appeals A party to a claim may appeal the Tribunal’s decision to the High Court on questions of law and fact.48 The leave of the High Court is required. A notice of appeal and application for leave to appeal must be filed in the...

3. CW v Accident Compensation Corporation (Claim for Mental Injury) [2022] NZACC 241 [pdf, 202 KB]

   ...AND ANY DETAILS THAT MIGHT IDENTIFY THE APPELLANT IN THE DISTRICT COURT AT WELLINGTON I TE KŌTI-Ā-ROHE KI TE WHANGANUI-A-TARA [2022] NZACC 241 ACR 38/22 UNDER THE ACCIDENT COMPENSATION ACT 2001 IN THE MATTER OF AN APPEAL UNDER SECTION 149 OF THE ACT BETWEEN CW Appellant AND ACCIDENT COMPENSATION CORPORATION Respondent Hearing: 2 December 2022 Held at: Wellington/Te Whanganui-a-Tara by AVL Appearances: B Hinchcliff for the Appe...

4. Ratima v Ratima - Tahoraiti 2A 12A (2023) 105 Takitimu MB 29 (105 TKT 29) [pdf, 312 KB]

   ...deliberately reached between parties.9 Furthermore, the proposed termination does not result in detriment to the Trust or the rightful beneficial owners. 9 Larkins v Kaitaia - Waihou Hutoia D2A Block [2013] Māori Appellate Court MB 159 (2013 APPEAL 159). 105 Tākitimu MB 35 Ngā kōrero a ngā Kaiurupare Respondents’ submissions [21] The respondents oppose the removal of Waikari as a beneficiary of the Trust. They believe that they still have whakapapa connections to...

5. [2024] NZEnvC 112 Fraser Auret Racing v Rangitīkei District Council [pdf, 644 KB]

   ...District Plan proposing to rezone land on the southern boundary of Marton from Rural to Industrial.1 A group called Interested Residents of Marton and Rangitikei Inc (IRO-MAR) joined the Fraser Auret appeal as a s 274 party. [2] The Council appealed the Court’s decision and IRO-MAR joined that appeal. The High Court allowed the appeal to the extent that it quashed paragraphs [224] and [225] of the Environment Court’s decision, and remitted the matters concerning the impositi...

6. Disputes-Tribunal-Amendment-Bill_FINAL.pdf [pdf, 1.5 MB]

   ...and determine the facts of the case. It has specific features that make it less formal than a Court, quicker and cheaper, including: 13.1 no standard right to legal representation, creating an even playing field for both parties; 13.2 limiting appeals to issues of unfairness or prejudice, promoting the finality of decisions, and 13.3 the statutory basis for the Tribunal’s decision-making, including that it shall have regard to the law, but not be bound to give effect to strict l...

7. [2021] NZEmpC 175 FDE v UWV [pdf, 241 KB]

   ...if there was no mutual consent FDE had been unjustifiably dismissed. Mr Fussey, counsel for the company, submitted that the “prime mover” test, previously applied by the Court in Marshall v TNL Freight Link,4 was overruled by the Court of Appeal in EN Ramsbottom v Chambers.5 He submits that following Ramsbottom a two stage inquiry is required – the Court must be satisfied that the termination was the unilateral act of the employer and that it was at their initiative. [18]...

8. Auckland Standards Committee 1 v Jindal [2024] NZLCDT 45 (24 December 2024) [pdf, 197 KB]

   ...recover a modest fee. The District Court Judge proceeded to a substantive hearing on a time tabled interlocutory matter; and on decision preferred the evidence of Mr Y, the plaintiff, and found against Mr Jindal. [2] As is his right, Mr Jindal appealed the District Court decision, however, withdrew that appeal after a (confidential) settlement was reached between him and Mr Y’s firm. [3] Mr Jindal remained disgruntled with the outcome of the District Court Proceedings, and...

9. [2023] NZEnvC 226 Scaife v Queenstown Lakes District Council [pdf, 1.2 MB]

   SCAIFE v QLDC – TOPIC 38 – INTERIM DECISION IN THE ENVIRONMENT COURT AT CHRISTCHURCH I TE KŌTI TAIAO O AOTEAROA KI ŌTAUTAHI Decision No. [2023] NZEnvC 226 IN THE MATTER of the Resource Management Act 1991 AND an appeal under clause 14 of the First Schedule of the Act BETWEEN M SCAIFE (ENV-2021-CHC-022) Appellant AND QUEENSTOWN LAKES DISTRICT COUNCIL Respondent Court: Environment Judge J J M Hassan Environment Commissioner J T Baines Hearing: at Queenstown...

10. Federated Farmers 261 [pdf, 192 KB]

    ...ENVIRONMENT COURT ENV–2016–AKL-000261 AT AUCKLAND IN THE MATTER of the Local Government (Auckland Transitional Provisions) Act 2010 (“the Act”) and the Resource Management Act 1991 (“the RMA”) AND IN THE MATTER of an appeal under section 156(3) of the Act BETWEEN MAN O’ WAR FARM LIMITED Appellant AND AUCKLAND COUNCIL Respondent NOTICE OF PERSON’S WISH TO BE PARTY TO PROCEEDINGS Section 274, Resource Management Act 1991...