Search Results

1. Bevan-Smith v One New Zealand Group Ltd (Strike Out) [2024] NZHRRT 48 [pdf, 583 KB]

   ...file its submissions first as it was legally represented). [31] On 31 May 2024, Dr Bevan-Smith filed a memorandum advising he would not be filing his evidence or submissions as to whether the claim should be struck out and that instead he intended to appeal an interim direction of the Tribunal regarding these matters. 7 [32] On 19 July 2024 Dr Bevan-Smith advised the Tribunal that he had withdrawn an appeal to the High Court and requested further time to file his submissions relating to t...

2. Ratima v Smith - Te Haroto 2B2B (2024) 113 Tākitimu MB 287 (113 TKT 287) [pdf, 241 KB]

   ...ballot. 29 of them agreed that the former trustees should pay $2,157.29 to the Trust. 13 of them disagreed. [8] During the period in which the poll was undertaken, Ivy Kahukiwa-Smith and Joyce Eparaima (together, “the respondents”) filed an appeal of the 19 July 2018 decision. It was rejected by the Chief Registrar on 13 September 2018 on the basis that a final decision had not been issued, pending the outcome of the poll of the beneficiaries. [9] The file then suffered from...

3. Tenancy Tribunal Annual Report 2024 [pdf, 1 MB]

   ...is dissatisfied with the decision of the Tribunal may appeal to the District Court, unless: • the decision was an interim order; • the amount in dispute was less than $1,000; or • the value of any work in dispute is less than $1,000. Appeals must be filed within 10 working days of the decision. There is no power to extend that deadline for filing an appeal. Access to the Tribunal is inexpensive and easy. An application is commenced by completing an application form and p...

4. [2025] NZREADT 29 – KE v REA (28 July 2025) [pdf, 274 KB]

   ...consideration; or (4) was plainly wrong. [25] It was submitted by the Registrar that, subject to these limitations, the Registrar’s decision must be confirmed, even if the Tribunal might come to a different decision on the merits if it was a general appeal. [26] We accept counsel’s submissions as to the nature of this review. We will, in deciding whether these limited grounds of review have been made out, need to make some assessment of the merits, without reaching any conclu...

5. Review Authority application for review [pdf, 396 KB]

   ...legal service that relates to the decision being reviewed is: (Please tick ) Criminal 1 Family Mental Health Criminal 2 Civil Maori Land Court/Appellate Court/Waitangi Tribunal Criminal 3 Immigration/Refugee Duty Solicitor Criminal 4 Court of Appeal/Supreme Court Police Detention Legal Assistance I am asking the Authority to review the Secretary for Justice’s decision: (Please tick ) Declining my application for approval to provide one or more legal aid services or specified legal...

6. [2025] NZREADT 36 – KC v REAA (22 August 2025) [pdf, 124 KB]

   ...consideration; or (4) was plainly wrong. [21] It was submitted by the Registrar that, subject to these limitations, the Registrar’s decision must be confirmed, even if the Tribunal might come to a different decision on the merits if it was a general appeal. 1 Real Estate Agents Act 2008, s 112(3). 2 Section 112(4). 3 Section 112(5). 4 Kacem v Bashir [2010] NZSC 112, [2011] 2 NZLR 1 at [32]. 6 [22] We accept counsel’s submissions as to the nature of this review. We wi...

7. ENVC Hearing 6Oct14 DM expert Robert Greenway [pdf, 2.7 MB]

   ...working on the Lyttelton Port Company’s earthquake recovery plan, which includes a marina development. I undertook some preliminary research on the Tairua Marina proposal but did not present evidence as I was unable to support my client’s appeal case. 9. Recreationally, I am an experienced sailor, and own a 9.45m keeler which is housed in the Nelson Marina. I can claim almost 50 years of boating experience, having been born while my parents were living aboard a home-built ya...

8. [2016] NZEmpC 95 Pretorius v Marra Construction (2004) Ltd [pdf, 270 KB]

   ...claims for restitution at common law is solidly based upon principles of unjust enrichment, rather than upon a notion of implied contract”. 22 [69] In Morning Star (St Luke’s Garden Apartments) Ltd v Canam Construction Ltd, the Court of Appeal considered the underlying basis of a quantum meruit claim and observed that whilst historically such had been treated as being based upon an implied contract, today it is generally seen as being a restitutionary claim. 23 That said,...

9. LCRO 172/2015 and 173/2015 WL v XC and HF v XC (16 May 2019) [pdf, 269 KB]

   ...scope of review [31] The nature and scope of a review have been discussed by the High Court, which said of the process of review under the Act:3 … 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...

10. Mayfair Street Units v Spargo [pdf, 323 KB]

    ...duty to someone else, the creation of a class of non-delegable duties seems to be self- contradictory... No single unifying principle is associated with the cases in which a non-delegable duty has been held to exist.” [25] Even the Court of Appeal noted the difficulties concerning non- delegable duty saying it was difficult to state clear principles (at p31). In Mt Albert Borough Council v Johnson a development company which had acquired and subdivided land and homes built on...