Search Results

1. Smith - Parish of Te Papa Allotment 865 Block as contained in SA54B/993 (2008) 91 Tauranga MB 285 (91 T 285) [pdf, 715 KB]

   ...matter back to the Maori Land Court to consider the application for a rehearing and, if that was granted, the substantive application to annul a change of status order. No decision was made on the specific performance application. [22] The Bruces appealed the decision of the High Court to adjourn the specific performance application. The Court of Appeal held as follows: 1. The members of the PCA had a statutory right of first refusal if the property were to be alienated under the...

2. Pryor v Perenara - Matata 930 (2005) 105 Whakatāne MB 254 (105 WHK 254) [pdf, 4.5 MB]

   ...Eugene Rondon were removed as trustees. The new tl1lstees are- Anipeka Tuna Henry Pryor Audrey Rota MOIl'is Ralll'eli Rita MalT Mark Sykes Tui Hunt Magdalene Mason Tame Minarapa Kristine Savage David Semmens The respondents appealed and on 28 June 2004 at Waiariki Appeal Minute Book 233- 245 the Maori Appellate Court allowed the appeal in part. The COlllt found no £1UIt with the appointment of the 11 new trustees (the 2003 trustees) and affinned the orders appoint...

3. Waitangi Tribunal Hearing Calendar (28 February 2019) [pdf, 587 KB]

   ...Wai 863 – Pouakani hearing (Judge Wainwright), Wellington Wellington 11 12 13 Wai 21802 – Taihape (Judge Harvey), Hearing Week 10, Venue TBC Wai 814/Wai 14893 – Mangatū Remedies (Judge Milroy), Panel Hui 3, Wellington Appeal Court 14 Wai 2180 – Taihape (Judge Harvey), Hearing Week 10, Venue TBC Appeal Court 15 Wai 2180 – Taihape (Judge Harvey), Hearing Week 10, Venue TBC Appeal Court 16 Wai 2180 – Taihape (Judge Harvey), Hear...

4. [2019] NZEmpC 37 Derbie v Tranzurban Hutt Valley Ltd [pdf, 674 KB]

   ...meal breaks defined by, or under, the other enactment applies instead of this Part. [19] These particular provisions applied from 6 March 2015, replacing those which were contained in the original Part 6D which took effect in 2009. The Court of Appeal described the 2015 regime as one which created a “a more flexible formula”: Lean Meats Oamaru v New Zealand Meat Workers and Related Trades Union Inc.5 [20] In an earlier decision, Jetstar Airways Ltd v Greenslade, the Court of Ap...

5. LCRO 74/2017 SD v TM (31 January 2019) [pdf, 218 KB]

   ...scope of review [36] The nature and scope of a review have been discussed by the High Court, which said of the process of review under the Act:11 … the power of review conferred upon Review Officers is not appropriately equated with a general appeal. The obligations and powers of the Review Officer as described in the Act create a very particular statutory process. The Review Officer has broad powers to conduct his or her own investigations including the power to exercise for th...

6. LCRO 151/2016 and 157/2016 NS v TD and TD v NS (27 September 2018) [pdf, 325 KB]

   ...safely be ignored. 3 [11] However, the Family Court judge who heard the protection order application accepted and used the Facebook material as propensity evidence when he made a protection order in favour of Ms R against Mr L. [12] Mr L appealed that order, with Mr NS still acting for him. One of the grounds advanced was that the Family Court judge erred in law in relying on the Facebook material as propensity evidence. [13] The High Court judge noted that Mr NS had acted...

7. Ref: LCRO 99/2019 SQ v LP (27 October 2020) [pdf, 235 KB]

   ...scope of review [49] The nature and scope of a review have been discussed by the High Court, which said of the process of review under the Act:7 … the power of review conferred upon Review Officers is not appropriately equated with a general appeal. The obligations and powers of the Review Officer as described in the Act create a very particular statutory process. The Review Officer has broad powers to conduct his or her own investigations including the power to exercise for that...

8. [2020] NZEmpC 141 H and C v RPW [pdf, 269 KB]

   ...respondent or to others with a legitimate interest in the outcome. The Supreme Court went on to say that: “[w]here there is significant delay coupled with significant prejudice, then it may well be appropriate to refuse leave even though the appeal appears to be strongly arguable.”10 8 An Employee v An Employer [2007] ERNZ 295 (EmpC) at [9]. 9 Almond v Read [2017] NZSC 80, [2017] 1 NZLR 801. 10 At [38](d). [23]...

9. [2019] NZEmpC 83 Pitman v Advanced Personnel Services Ltd [pdf, 374 KB]

   ...costs. [51] However, the inquiry does not start and stop with the assessment of actual costs.36 In George the Court considered whether a contractual indemnity involved any discretion under cl 19(1) of sch 3 to the Act.37 Applying the Court of Appeal’s decision in Watson & Son Ltd v Active Manuka Honey Association, the Court held that no discretion remains where a contractual indemnity is enforced, but there are public policy considerations and an assessment is needed as to w...

10. LCRO 185/2020 BC v DE and FG decision & minute (20 May 2021 & 30 April 2021) [pdf, 201 KB]

    ...the issue as being whether it was the “appropriate forum to consider Ms BC’s complaint.”1 It further noted that a Committee “can decide to take no further action on a complaint where it considers there is an adequate remedy or right of appeal that would be reasonable for the complainant to exercise.”2 [28] The Committee then observed that the Office of the Privacy Commissioner “was established to provide information on privacy matters and to resolve privacy disputes, for...