Search Results

1. Munu - Mangamuka West 3H2C (2006) 112 Whangarei MB 243 (112 WH 243) [pdf, 623 KB]

   ...land". [35] The applicants stated the reasons for partition in the application form as follows: "Our grandmothers name being used in vain. For the best interest for our children, their children and so on, save the stress, headaches and cost their parents are going through now, having grievance and objections from the whanau's included in the above name blk Mangamuka West 342C. We would like to see them live on the land, provide for their whanau's, keeping in mind o...

2. O'Rorke v Hohaia - Pukekohatu (2006) 173 Aotea MB 114 (173 AOT 114) [pdf, 599 KB]

   ...For these reasons the application for partition is dismissed. [31] A conference will be convened at Hawera on 24 August 2006 to enable the parties to convey their views to the Court on the future use of the land. [32] There will be no order as to costs. Pronounced in open Court at l.oo pm on f\AOltJl)~'( the ~ \ S.,- day of r\-u~~E 2006. ---------......... ----z<

3. [2017] NZEmpC 109 ALA v ITE [pdf, 162 KB]

   ...this judgment is to be served by ALA on ITE in accordance with the directions given in paras 4 and 5 of my minute of 25 August 2017. ALA is also to use its best endeavours to provide a copy to him personally, as soon as can be arranged. [34] Costs are reserved. B A Corkill Judge Judgment signed at 2.15 pm on 1 September 2017

4. Wang v Fu [2016] NZIACDT 38 (8 August 2016) [pdf, 109 KB]

   ...[33] The Tribunal has upheld the complaint and pursuant to section 51 of the Act, it may impose sanctions. [34] The Authority and the complainant have the opportunity to provide submissions on appropriate sanctions. [35] They potentially include costs; refund of fees, and compensation for any losses flowing from Mr Fu’s conduct that the Tribunal found breached his professional obligations. [36] Whether they do provide submissions and evidence of claims or not, Mr Fu is entitled to ma...

5. Minister of Māori Development - Otaramuturangi or Otara o Mutu Rangi (Burial Ground) (2017) 163 Waiariki MB 246 (163 WAR 246) [pdf, 304 KB]

   ...the applications filed on behalf of Tūwharetoa ki Kawerau and Ngāti Rangitihi for the appointment of trustees to Otaramuturangi as soon as possible, after consulting with the applicants as to a suitable date. [37] There will be no order as to costs. Pronounced at 4.55 pm in Rotorua on Tuesday this 8 th day of June 2017 L R Harvey JUDGE 13 Rameka v Hall [2013] NZCA 203 see also Apatu v Trustees of O...

6. LCRO 128/2015 GBA v HCB (29 June 2017) [pdf, 197 KB]

   ...vendor’s lawyer”. Application for review [7] Mr GBA filed an application for review on 24 June 2015. The outcome he seeks is a reversal of the Standards Committee’s decision, and that the orders made by the Committee, namely, a fine and costs, be quashed. [8] In support of his application he submits that: (a) The Committee was mistaken in stating that he had admitted that he had made a technical breach of his undertaking. (b) On the afternoon of the settlement date, 5...

7. Eriwata - Waitara SD Section 6 and 91 Land Trust (2005) 155 Aotea MB 269 (155 AOT 269) [pdf, 575 KB]

   ...section 19(1)(a) of the Act. Margaret Eriwata has thirty (30) days to vacate the Land and remove all vehicles, possessions and other property. Ms Eriwata's application for injunction is dismissed. Counsel may wish to submit memoranda regarding costs. Dated at Rotorua this ~"'l+ day of 0lM.-.1(J 2005

8. Morrison - Ngati Whakaue Tribal Lands Incorporation (2004) 283 Rotorua MB 264 (283 ROT 264) [pdf, 727 KB]

   ...application would have been dismissed. There is no evidence before me that calfs the merits of the transaction into question and it must be remembered that it is only in special and extreme cases that this Court could interfere. There is an issue of costs and that is reserved. The parties may file written submissions. ~r1k day of 2004

9. Complaints Assessment Committee 408 v Colin Boyer [2017] NZREADT 43 [pdf, 199 KB]

   ...10 [2017] NZREADT 43 - Boyer licences, both in his personal name and his company name, be suspended for a further period of six months from the date of this order. It is also appropriate that Mr Boyer pay a small fine so that the total cost of the prosecution does not fall on the profession. Mr Boyer is to pay a fine in the sum of $1,500. [16] Mr Boyer is also censured. A suspension recognises the severity of the conduct but still enable an agent to be rehabilitated. [17...

10. [2019] NZEmpC 23 Rachelle v Air New Zealand Ltd [pdf, 437 KB]

    ...unjustifiably dismissed by Air NZ. If an amended pleading is not filed an order dealing with Air NZ’s application to strike out paragraph [1](a)(5) of the fifth amended statement of claim will be made without the need for a further application. [38] Costs are reserved. K G Smith Judge Judgment signed at 11.30 am on 5 March 2019