Search Results

1. Milner v Milner - Estate of Warihi Te Keu Faenza Milner (2008) 83 Ruatoria MB 108 (83 RUA 108) [pdf, 2.8 MB]

   ...the applicant time to consider the affidavit of Dr Hirini Mead that was flied just prior to the hearing. I [5] The next hearing was to be held on 1 September 2004. 2 However, on 25 Angust 2005 the former counsel for the applicant, Ms Rudland requested an adjoun1l11ent of the application to 4 October 2008 . Mr Barber was instructed to oppose the adjournment pointing out that Dr Mead had reananged lli s professional schedule to be present. The COUli declined the adjournment and the...

2. [2017] NZEnvC 067 PowerCo Limited v Thames-Coromandel District Council [pdf, 481 KB]

   ...proceedings in seeking to enforce the public law as a matter of principle, a belief that activity of a particular kind ought to be prevented, or as part of an endeavour to achieve the objects of an association, or uphold the values which it was formed to promote, would not be an interest in the proceedings greater than that of the public generally. Nor would an interest in the preservation of a particular environment, or an intellectual or emotional concern, the satisfaction of righti...

3. LCRO 189/2015 ZA v YB [pdf, 262 KB]

   ...1 An incorporated firm. 2 agreement provided, amongst other things, that the purchaser would carry out the subdivision at the vendor’s cost. [4] Almost a year later, on 19 May 2014, the vendor’s lawyer requested a copy of the power of attorney granted by the purchaser to Ms VE, as attorney. [5] Because the date of that power of attorney post-dated the date of the agreement by 5 and a half months, the vendor “[challenged] the validity” of

4. [2018] NZEnvC 052 Queenstown Airport Corporation Limited [pdf, 3.3 MB]

   ...requirement for Lot 6 under layouts that are different from the one advanced by Queenstown Airport ("QAC") in the earlier proceeding, materiality refers to the decision made by the Environment Court. We agree with QAC that materiality informs what is meant by "important" evidence in s 294(1). Evidence will not be important unless it is material to the decision made by 4 Shepherd v Environment COUIt (NZHC) Auckland CIV-2011-404-3091, 21 October 2011 . 5 Shepherd v...

5. [2018] NZEmpC 46 Evans-Walsh v Southern District Health Board [pdf, 367 KB]

   ...identified and questioned by Ms Evans- Walsh’s lawyer. The DHB was asked whether the point had been reached where it had decided she had engaged in serious misconduct. That was not an idle inquiry, because it was the backdrop to asking whether the requested comments were confined to possible sanctions to be imposed or could be about the complaints themselves. [16] The DHB confirmed a decision was still to be made. That reply led to a detailed challenge to the adequacy, and com...

6. Matchitt v Butler - Matangareka 3B Ahu Whenua Trust (2016) 154 Waiariki MB 261 (154 WAR 261) [pdf, 226 KB]

   ...Trust chairperson, John Butler, to undertake some preparatory road works on the block. This was paid in two instalments of $20,000 on 29 August 2016, and $30,000 on 30 August 2016. [23] Between 29 September and 4 October 2016 the Trust advertised a request for expressions of interest for road engineering, harvesting, and distribution contracts in local newspapers in Opotiki, Rotorua, Whakatane and Gisborne. When the expressions of interest closed on 14 October, the only responses re...

7. LCRO 19/2017 VY v WR [pdf, 191 KB]

   ...WR. Review on the papers [39] The parties have agreed to the review being dealt with on the papers. This review has been undertaken on the papers pursuant to s 206(2) of the Act which allows a LCRO to conduct the review on the basis of all information available if the LCRO considers that the review can be adequately determined in the absence of the parties. 6 The Insurance and Financial Services Ombudsman. 8 [40] I have been a...

8. Apostolakis v Attorney-General No. 2 (Strike-Out Application) [2017] NZHRRT 53 [pdf, 201 KB]

   ...5.26 and 5.27). Those requirements apply equally in proceedings before the Tribunal. Specifically: [8.1] The pleading must be accurate, clear and intelligible. [8.2] Sufficient particulars must be given to enable the defendant to be fairly informed of the case to be met. [8.3] While adequate particulars are required, the statement of claim must not stray into setting out the evidence relied upon. [9] See also Mackrell v Universal College of Learning at [57] to [59]: [57] Parties...

9. BORA Electoral (Integrity) Amendment Bill [pdf, 419 KB]

   ...55D(a)): "... has acted in a way that has distorted, and is likely to continue to distort, the proportionality of political party representation in Parliament as determined at the last general election"; 4.2.2 The parliamentary leader has informed the member that he or she considers that proposed s 55D(a) applies to that member and of the reasons for that opinion and had advised that member that he or she has 21 days in which to respond (proposed s 55D(b)); and 4.2.3 That,...

10. The Real Estate Agents Authority (CAC 413) v Taylor [2018] NZREADT 24 [pdf, 208 KB]

    ...at a substantial undervalue. [8] The sale of Kilbryde Crescent was not one of the matters that was directly the subject matter of a charge against Ms Taylor. Mr Hodge, counsel for the committee, said that it was referred to as a matter of informative background to the charges in respect of other properties which will be mentioned shortly. [9] The next property transaction in chronological order concerned a sale of a property at 4A Shirley Avenue, Papakura. That property had be...