Search Results

1. AB v ZY LCRO 54 / 2010 (27 January 2011) [pdf, 84 KB]

   ...caveat. [10] The Respondent acted for Ms M in the dispute with Mr H while he was alive, and subsequently continued to act on her behalf after his death. [11] The Estate eventually abandoned its claim for reasons which are not evident from the file. History of complaint [12] On 8 March 2006, the Applicant lodged a complaint with both the X District Law Society (XDLS) and the MoH. [13] The core of the complaint related to the Respondent’s role in acting for Ms M in connection...

2. Barnett - Waotu North 2H2, 2H3 and 2H4 (2005) 286 Rotorua MB 258 (286 ROT 258) [pdf, 657 KB]

   ...North 2H4 Change of Status Sections 135 & 136, Te Ture Whenua Maori Act 1993 Mr P S Stuart for A Barnett and others 10 October and 15 December 2003 RESERVED DECISION On 3 December 2001 Hilton Anthony Barnett ("the Applicant") filed two applications pursuant to sections 315 and 316 of Te Ture Whenua Maori Act 1993 ("the Act"). The first was for orders creating an easement ("the Easement Application") and the second for the laying out of a roadway (&...

3. Martin Trusts TRI-2017-100-006 Procedural Order 9 [pdf, 256 KB]

   ...15.1 are directory and not mandatory. They provide that a claimant should allow inspection before “filing a claim with the Tribunal”. That is, the period after acceptance of an eligible claim, but before an application for adjudication is filed. A claimant should, but not must, allow inspection. [49] When a claimant files an application for adjudication with the Tribunal, the Tribunal would have no hesitation in ordering a pre- remediation inspection by any potential respo...

4. Deputy Registar - Lot 1 DP 150873 Waikoukou No 406 [2019] Chief Judge's MB 264 (2019 CJ 264) [pdf, 302 KB]

   ...the time of its taking. The Court now makes an order revesting the land in Paora Tuhaere & Wiremu Reweti te Whenua pursuant to s.134/93 & pursuant to s. 134(2)/93 determining the land to be Maori freehold land, subject to the applicant filing an application pursuant to s.18(1)(i)/93 with a hearing to be held at Reweti Marae, such application to be filed, without fee within 6 months. When that application will be heard will be the subject of further direction of the Court hav...

5. [2024] NZEmpC 209 Whare Manaaki Inc v Anderson and Ors [pdf, 216 KB]

   ...JUDGMENT OF JUDGE J C HOLDEN (Application for freezing and ancillary orders) [1] This judgment resolves a without notice application for a freezing order and ancillary orders, and for directions as to service. [2] The application was filed urgently late on 25 October 2024. At that stage, I was not satisfied that the circumstances justified a freezing order, but the application was adjourned to allow the applicant to file more evidence in support of its application. It di...

6. [2024] NZEmpC 253 Johnston v Te Whatu Ora - Health New Zealand [pdf, 233 KB]

   ...questions of law set out above are important questions that are likely to arise other than incidentally. [42] The applicant should file and serve a statement of claim within 30 days of the date of this judgment. It will not be necessary to pay a filing fee. Costs [43] Costs are reserved. If the parties are unable to agree, Mr Johnston will have 30 days from the date of this judgment within which to file and serve any memorandum and supporting material, with Te Whatu Ora...

7. Deputy Registrar v Te Bach 2007 Ltd - Ohawini D8 (2010) 15 Taitokerau MB 3 (15 TTK 3) [pdf, 171 KB]

   ...whether the land is Māori freehold land or General land. 15 Taitokerau MB 4 Hearings [3] I briefly explain the hearing process lest it be thought that the Court proceeded without giving proper notice to Mrs Hati. [4] The application was filed on 11 November 2008. On 15 December 2008 I issued a direction setting down this and several other applications for a special fixture in February 2009. 1 The applications were unrelated but shared a common feature in that transfers app...

8. Taniwha v Sheehan - Ririwha (Stephenson Island) (2020) 216 Taitokerau MB 274 (216 TTK 274) [pdf, 259 KB]

   ...She contends that trustees have benefited personally from using the island, proper processes have not been followed, and third-party entities have been established to administer affairs on the island without proper authority. [2] Ms Taniwha filed an application seeking a review of the Trust. She now seeks the removal of two trustees for cause, Michael Sheehan and Desmond Rudolph. This decision determines whether those two trustees should be removed, and what should happen in

9. Moore - Lot 30 DP 40840 (being Oakura F2A) [2020] Māori Appellate Court MB 209 (2020 APPEAL 209) [pdf, 234 KB]

   ...other provisions of the 1993 Act (including ss 2 and 17) are of no effect. We do not accept that ss 2 and 17 of the 1993 Act are entirely irrelevant here. The original application in the present 2020 Māori Appellate Court MB 220 case was filed pursuant to s 18(1)(h) of the 1993 Act for a determination under s 131.31 We are exercising jurisdiction under the 1993 Act. Section 2(2) of the 1993 Act records Parliament’s intention that powers, duties, and discretions conferred...

10. Manaena-Biddle v Biddle-Bassett - Te Atuareretahi (2019) 223 Waiariki MB 182 (223 WAR 182) [pdf, 159 KB]

    ...block, being Māori freehold land, approximately 39.52 hectares in size. The trust has a shareholding of 5,931.17 shares (out of 35,979 total shares) in this block. [7] The trust is also involved in parallel civil proceedings in the District Court filed by Kaitoa Logging to compel payment from the trust for harvesting work carried out on the Hapenui block. On 30 November 2018, judgment was given to Kaitoa Logging by default for $26,899.30. Procedural history [8] An applicati...