Search Results

1. NZ Law Commission review of the law of Trusts [pdf, 2.4 MB]

   ...August 2013, Wellington, New Zealand | REPORT 130 REVIEW OF THE LAW OF TRUSTS A TRUSTS ACT FOR NEW ZEALAND The Law Commission is an independent, publicly funded, central advisory body established by statute to undertake the systematic review, reform and development of the law of New Zealand. Its purpose is to help achieve law that is just, principled, and accessible, and that reflects the heritage and aspirations of the peoples of New Zealand. The Commissioners are: Honourable Sir Grant H...

2. OP v UV LCRO 160/2015 [pdf, 168 KB]

   ...that she was returning the signed documents. Ms UV then filed the application for probate and various documents in support at the High Court. She also filed Mrs OP’s notice of choice of option A under the PRA. [15] On 18 August 2014 Mrs OP requested an update and information. Ms UV replied the same day, saying that she was awaiting the Grant of the Probate. She also suggested that the trustees execute the share transfer forms as executors, but advised they may also require a...

3. Due North Trust v Gardner [2011] NZWHT Auckland 64 [pdf, 262 KB]

   ...negligence.10 This has little applicability to the present case. [91] The Council also relies on the obiter dicta of Tipping J in the Supreme Court judgement in Byron Avenue and Sunset Terraces.11 This is to the effect that if a purchaser fails to request a LIM which would have given notice of actual or potential problems, rather than just constituting contributory negligence at a high level, it may break the chain of causation from the Council’s negligence at the inspectio...

4. Marywil Investments Ltd v North Shore Ctiy Council [pdf, 65 KB]

   ...TO BRING ASSIGNED CLAIM .......................................... 25 IS THE CLAIM LIMITATION BARRED? ...................................................... 31 DID MR KANON OWE THE CLAIMANTS A DUTY OF CARE? .................. 43 DID MR KANON PERFORM ANY DEFECTIVE WORK .............................. 47 Roof to Wall Junctions and Flashings ....................................................... 48 Sealing of penetrations and cladding material .......................................... 5...

5. Lavender v Attorney-General (Strike-Out Application) [2021] NZHRRT 52 [pdf, 113 KB]

   ...declined to fund further sessions on the grounds Mr Lavender had not been ordinarily resident in New Zealand at the time the abuse occurred. [3] In these proceedings under Part 1A of the Human Rights Act 1993 (HRA) Mr Lavender in his second statement of claim dated 23 October 2020 alleges he has been declined cover for mental injury by reason of his national origins, nationality or citizenship. The claim is one of both direct and indirect discrimination. The strike-out application [...

6. [2013] NZEmpC 133 2013 Dolev v Netafim Australia Pty Ltd [pdf, 186 KB]

   ...[10] Mr Dolev stated in his evidence that upon return to Israel he was to become the manager of Netafim Israel, Africa Division in Ethiopia. He informed Netafim in February 2008 that he intended to relocate to Israel. He agreed with Netafim’s request to defer the move until the end of that year. He officially resigned in September 2008 but agreed to stay on until the end of November 2008. This was by arrangement between Netafim and Netafim Israel. The full-time permanent empl...

7. O'Brien v Accident Compensation Corporation (Challenge to impairment assessment) [2024] NZACC 120 (22 July 2024) [pdf, 206 KB]

   ...when a decision has been made can there be a right of review and if no right of review exists then s133(5) has no application ... The substance [of the communication in question] has to be analysed…. [47] … merely administrative issues and requests, do not amount to a ‘decision’ within the meaning of s.6 of the legislation. Whether a ‘decision’ has been made needs to be determined in the factual context and circumstances. Discussion [40] Ms Aubrey, for Mr O’Brien...

8. National Standards Committee v Denham [2017] NZLCDT 10 [pdf, 96 KB]

   ...efforts. [28] The relationship property proceedings were still on foot and had not yet come to a hearing. On 21 March 2014 Ms Denham instituted a private prosecution against Mr Clague. The charge was framed as “male assaults female”. The request for issue of a summons against Mr Clague went before a District Court Judge and was released shortly before 6 May 2014. In the meantime the Family Court had allocated a date of 28-30 May for the relationship property proceedings. [...

9. Peita - Motatau 3H2[2019]Chief Judge's MB 337 (2019 CJ 337) [pdf, 362 KB]

   ...there were five owners. He stated that all owners had received notice of the hearing and there were no objections. He stated that the block was earlier partitioned “but never settled in Court.” He advised that the owners were living on these informal partitions and that rating was an issue. The two owners he represented wanted to be located in partition proposal 3H2A. The Court, after noting that the application was designed to give effect to a family arrangement among the owners,...

10. Auckland Standards Committee v Comeskey [2010] NZLCDT 19 [pdf, 121 KB]

    ...facts: 30.1 Mr Comeskey had raised the issue of calling a milk powder expert with the trial Judge in Chambers during the course of cross-examination of Crown witnesses. 30.2 The backpack and scales were brought to Court during the trial at the request of Mr Comeskey so he could examine them. This was prior to Detective McKay giving evidence. Accordingly Mr Comeskey knew the backpack was at the Court and was available. 30.3 When Detective McKay gave evidence about which Mr...