Search Results

1. Ngatai - Tokata B8 Trustees (2015) 50 Tairawhiti MB 175 (50 TRW 175) [pdf, 218 KB]

   ...the owners, then that is a matter for the owners to address at an AGM. Section 222 can be fully considered at the time of the appointment of any new trustee. The time to have made an issue of the appointment of the current trustees was in 2011 by appealing to the Māori Appellate Court. It is well beyond the appeal period now. Section 238 cannot be used to unsettle those appointments. Thus the Second Cause of Action must fail. Order [36] The application is dismissed. The Registrar i...

2. Baker - Part Lot 1 DP 13787 (formerly Pt Tarawera 5A) (2015) 41 Tākitimu MB 281 (41 TKT 281) [pdf, 256 KB]

   ...title, estate, or interest 8 The Proprietors of Mangakino Township v Maori Land Court CA65/99, 16 June 1999 41 Tākitimu MB 286 [20] In Attorney General v Māori Land Court the Court of Appeal considered the jurisdiction of this Court: 9 Section 17 … states in subs (1) the primary objective of the Maori Land Court and reinforces the preamble - to promote and assist in the retention of Maori land and General land owned b...

3. [2013] NZEmpC 210 MAS Zengrange (NZ) Ltd v HDT Ltd [pdf, 138 KB]

   ...direction requiring someone to produce documents to it. 6 [2013] NZEmpC 150. 7 [2006] ERNZ 221. 8 [2005] ERNZ 471. That judgment is currently the subject of an application for leave to appeal although I do not understand the particular point at issue in this case to be the subject of the intended appeal. That judgment is Aarts v Barnardos New Zealand. 9 In that case the Authority refused to issue a summons to the Commi...

4. EA v WSC2 LCRO 11 / 2011 (24 June 2011) [pdf, 124 KB]

   ...conduct of a kind specified in section 130(c) of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 and hereby causes an investigation to be made into this matter. [5] The matters into which the Standards Committee had decided to inquire were the subject of appeal to the High Court, and the Standards Committee decided to await the outcome of the appeal before proceeding with its own motion investigation. [6] On 17 August 2010, the Complaints Service wrote to the Applicant in the following terms:...

5. Denbighshire v Galashiels LCRO 218 / 2009 (26 February 2010) [pdf, 93 KB]

   ...litigant of me personally in the High Court. [35] I do not understand this to be the case. Mr Denbighshire’s proceedings quite correctly name the Legal Complaints Review Officer as the respondent to his judicial review application. He is in effect appealing the costs aspect of the earlier decision. In this sense being the subject of judicial review is a usual incident of issuing decisions which are otherwise unappealable. I also observe that the judicial review application argues...

6. Sandy v Khan LCRO 181 / 2009 (25 December 2009) - Decision on orders [pdf, 112 KB]

   ...provides that an order for compensation may be made where it appears that any person has suffered loss by reason of any act or omission of a lawyer. This issue therefore is whether general damages represent compensation for loss or not. The Court of Appeal has recognised that such distress damages are compensatory in nature: Paper Reclaim Ltd v Aotearoa International Ltd [2006] 3 NZLR 188 (CA) at para 171. One commentator has noted “it is now more widely accepted that, where sig...

7. Broadman - Waimarama 3A 4B Sec 5 (2018) 66 Tākitimu MB 207 (66 TKT 207) [pdf, 332 KB]

   ...risk to the assets of the trust or a serious allegation requiring intervention.11 [24] A review of trust will therefore often require consideration of a trust’s performance and the competence of its trustees.12 In Rameka v Hall the Court of Appeal referred to the general responsibilities of trustees set out in s 223 of the Act, which include carrying out the terms of the trust, the proper administration and management of the business of the trust, the

8. BORA Visiting Forces Bill [pdf, 214 KB]

   ...account the fact that these persons are physically in New Zealand and that the visiting force is in this country 1 Wright v Cantrell (1943) 61 WN (NSW) 38; applied by the English Court of Appeal in Littrell v United States of America (no 2) [1994] 4 All ER 203, 299; see also Holland v Lampen-Wolfe [2000] 3 All ER 833 (HL), which applied the same legal principles in a different military context. pursuant to an act done by the...

9. DV v RG LCRO 141/2015 (28 June 2016) [pdf, 79 KB]

   ...and Scope of Review [20] The nature and scope of a review have been discussed by the High Court, which said of the process of review under the Act:2 … 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...

10. Paikea - Otara 5D1 (2016) 140 Taitokerau MB 78 (140 TTK 78) [pdf, 220 KB]

    ...application to change the status per s 135 of the Act: 5 [40] The general principles applicable to a change of status have developed over time. There are a number of decisions of the Māori Land Court, Māori Appellate Court, High Court and Court of Appeal which are of relevance. They are Cleave – 5 Apaapa – Te Pura A No 17 (2010) 6 Waikato Maniapoto MB 1 (6 WMN 1). 140 Taitokerau MB 83 Orokawa 3B (1995) 4 Taitokerau...