Search Results

1. Alloa v Ullapool LCRO 159/09 (22 June 2010) [pdf, 162 KB]

   ...to her, he would be required to give evidence, and could be summonsed for that purpose. [5] The second letter [letter B] became the subject of the Applicant’s complaint to the New Zealand Law Society. In this letter the Practitioner informed the Applicant that he could face potential liability as a party for the losses claimed by R. The Practitioner enclosed a draft amended statement of claim showing the Applicant and his company named as defendants and suggested he may wa...

2. [2010] NZEmpC 10 Snowdon v Radio New Zealand Ltd [pdf, 147 KB]

   ...course of the hearing of the disclosure challenge on 24 September 2009 I raised with counsel what appeared to me to be the underlying disclosure issue between the parties, which was whether the exercise undertaken by the defendant to change the format of the financial material it held, on what was described as the “SunSystem”, into the 5 CD-ROMs, was undertaken for the purpose of concealing from the plaintiff the true position of the defendant’s financial records. The disclos...

3. Samuels v Matauri X Incorporation - Matauri X Incorporation (2007) 120 Whangarei MB 52 (120 WH 52) [pdf, 9.4 MB]

   ...September 2006. However, on 25 August 2006 Ms Afa sought an adjournment of the hearing as a shareholders meeting was scheduled for 14 October 2006. A new hearing date of 19 December 2006 was then allocated, however, that was later also vacated at the request of Ms Afa as it did not suit Mr Samuels. A further hearing date of 14 FebLUary 2007 was later also vacated at the request of Mr Davis, who by the begirming of this year had taken over acting for Mr Samuels. [7] On 6 March 20...

4. LM v RB LCRO 332/2012 (15 June 2016) [pdf, 54 KB]

   ...as for the Standards Committee. 15 [47] I have therefore given consideration as to whether or not this decision should be published. [48] It is the practice of this Office to seek submissions on publication from the parties if the LCRO forms a preliminary view that publication may be in the public interest. Again, and at this stage, it is a matter of discretion. [49] One of the expressed purposes of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act is “to protect the consumers of legal se...

5. Thompson v Love [pdf, 23 KB]

   ...Apron Flashing [14] Mr Love admits that the apron flashing terminated behind the exterior cladding but says that he did not install the apron flashing and that he followed proper construction practice. Mr Love says that the apron flashing forms part of the roof, which was installed by Carter Holt Harvey and that Carter Holt Harvey followed accepted trade practice at the time. Mr Love states that, at the time of construction, the apron flashings were not required to turn up at...

6. Lewis & Ors [2011] NZWHT Auckland 13 [pdf, 87 KB]

   1 [2011] NZWHT AUCKLAND 13 UNDER the Weathertight Homes Resolution Services Act 2006 IN THE MATTER of a reconsideration of the Chief Executive’s decision under section 49 CLAIM NO. 6451: NICHOLAS ROMILLY LEWIS AND DIANE HERMA LEWIS AND CHRISTOPHER ELLIOT RICHIE – 18 CAPTAIN EDWARD DANIELL DRIVE, NGAIO ELIGIBILITY DECISION OF THE CHAIR OF THE WEATHERTIGHT HOMES TRIBUNAL The Claim [1] Nicholas and Diane Lewis and Christopher Ritchi...

7. Marshall & McCardle [2011] NZWHT Auckland 5 [pdf, 89 KB]

   1 H[2011] NZWHT AUCKLAND 5 UNDER the Weathertight Homes Resolution Services Act 2006 IN THE MATTER of a reconsideration of the Chief Executive’s decision under section 49 CLAIM NO. 6401: COREY MARSHALL AND KAREN MCCARDLE – 32 MASTERTON ROAD, ROTHESAY BAY ELIGIBILITY DECISION OF THE CHAIR OF THE WEATHERTIGHT HOMES TRIBUNAL The Claim [1] Corey Marshall and Karen McCardle, as the trustees for the Marshall Family Trust, are the owners...

8. BORA Ngāruahine Claims Settlement Bill [pdf, 274 KB]

   ...consistent with articles 14 and 27 of the International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights, which are comparable to ss 20 and 27(2) of the Bill of Rights Act. [3] Whether s 27(3) at issue 8. Clause 24(3) of the Bill excludes damages and other forms of monetary compensation as a remedy for any failure by the Crown to comply with a protocol under the Bill. 9. This clause may be seen to raise the issue of compliance with s 27(3) of the Bill of Rights Act, namely the right to bring c...

9. BORA Hineuru Claims Settlement Bill [pdf, 288 KB]

   ...articles 14 and 27 of the International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights, which are comparable to ss 20 and 27(2) of the Bill of Rights Act. [3] Whether s 27(3) at issue 8. Clauses 26(3) and 30 of the Bill respectively exclude damages or other forms of monetary compensation as a remedy for any failure by the Crown to comply with Te Kawenata without good cause or a protocol under the Bill. 9. These clauses may be seen to raise the issue of compliance with s 27(3) of the Bill of...

10. BORA Ngāti Whātua o Kaipara Claims Settlement Bill [pdf, 289 KB]

    ...exclusion was consistent with arts 14 and 27 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which are comparable to ss 20 and 27(2) of the Bill of Rights Act.[5] Exclusion of remedy of compensation 8. Clause 29(3) excludes any form of monetary compensation as a remedy for any failure of the Crown to comply with a Culture and Heritage protocol issued under Part 2 of the Bill. It might be argued that this clause limits the right to bring civil proceedings against th...