Search Results

1. Auckland Standards Committee 2 v Burcher [2018] NZLCDT 37 [pdf, 276 KB]

   ...company’s trust account until 24 August 2015. [41] There was a further delay before Mr Burcher placed the deposit into interest- bearing deposit on 30 September 2015. [42] Then, prior to the settlement date, in late November 2015 at Mr K’s request, because he had a temporary liquidity problem, Mr Burcher refunded $10,000 of the deposit to Mr K on a temporary basis. 7 By transfer from the purchaser’s funds held in the trust accoun...

2. Juror Satisfaction Survey 2019 Results Report [pdf, 998 KB]

   ...rooms .................................................................................... 7 Food and beverage facilities ........................................................................................... 8 Jurors’ satisfaction with the information provided .............................................................. 8 Information prior to arriving at court ................................................................................ 8 Information about whether jurors ar...

3. Gwak & Kim TRI-2020-100-006 Procedural Order 5 [pdf, 223 KB]

   ...required to be determined at this early stage. [24] The first respondent, self-evidently, has an interest in not being exposed to claims unnecessarily. He has a legitimate interest in being able to defend the claims with the benefit of as much information as is available and not to have that information restricted by the inexcusable effluxion of time. [25] Those interests are balanced in this Procedural Order. Chronology [26] The relevant chronology is: (a) A building conse...

4. Aperahama v Anderson - Sections 57 58 70 72 and 100 of Ratana Pa (2022) 447 Aotea MB 93 (447 AOT 93) [pdf, 262 KB]

   ...Court in subsection (1) applies to representation of a class or group of Maori in or for the purpose of (current or intended) proceedings, negotiations, consultations, allocations of property, or other matters. 447 Aotea MB 99 (3) A request for advice or an application for an order under subsection (1) is an application within the ordinary jurisdiction of the Maori Land Court, and the Maori Land Court has the power and authority to give advice and make determinations as...

5. [2022] NZEnvC 090 Cable Bay Wines Limited v Auckland Council [pdf, 397 KB]

   ...undertaken over ten dates during the summer period to confirm compliance with the interim enforcement orders. The outcome was that there was general compliance with some compliance issues to be resolved. (m) Further to this, the s 27 4 parties requested that an audit be completed as to the buildings on site. The Council was directed by the Court to complete this and it did so. (n) On 22 February 2019 the second interim decision of the Environment Court was issued. 7 In that deci...

6. [2021] NZREADT 54 – Complaints Assessment Committee 2106 v Mathers (6 December 2021) [pdf, 257 KB]

   ...Background [2] Ms Mather is a licensed salesperson, who was previously engaged by Andco Realty 1, trading as Clark & Co (the agency). [3] It was alleged that, while exploring alternative agency engagement, Ms Mather sent confidential information from her agency database to her personal email address. A colleague also sent client information to Ms Mather’s personal computer. Ms Mather additionally exported a list of client contacts to her personal email address. This all

7. Kruger v Nikora - Tuhoe -Te Uru Taumatua [2021] Māori Appellate Court MB 444 (2021 APPEAL 444) [pdf, 296 KB]

   ...Trustees. [24] We highlight these provisions, because whilst it is fair to characterise the Trust Deed as encompassing objectives beyond the holding and retention of land, assessments of the purpose for which a trust is constituted based on some form of “primacy” test is not straight forward. Taking a purposive approach to the interpretation of the Act, and Part 12 in particular, we conclude that interpreting the jurisdiction of the Court over trusts that hold General l...

8. [2021] NZEnvC 161 Marlborough District Council v Gifford [pdf, 477 KB]

   ...required completion dates for compliance with Orders B1, B2, B4, B5, and B9. The effect of that agreement was 6 that the application related only to Orders B3, B10, B12, and B13. The balance of the application was suspended at the Council’s request. The amendments to the Orders agreed between the parties Orders B1 and B2 Pukapuka Stream – Riparian Planting [10] Orders B1 and B2 were varied in the Court’s decision of 26 November 2020. Following that variation, the ord...

9. [2021] NZEnvC 161 Marlborough District Council v Gifford [pdf, 477 KB]

   ...required completion dates for compliance with Orders B1, B2, B4, B5, and B9. The effect of that agreement was 6 that the application related only to Orders B3, B10, B12, and B13. The balance of the application was suspended at the Council’s request. The amendments to the Orders agreed between the parties Orders B1 and B2 Pukapuka Stream – Riparian Planting [10] Orders B1 and B2 were varied in the Court’s decision of 26 November 2020. Following that variation, the ord...

10. Insley v Insley - Awanui Haparapara No 2B No 1B Sec 2 [2023] Chief Judge's MB 323 (2023 CJ 323) [pdf, 416 KB]

    ...order is disputed by the applicants due to the size of the land over which the order is granted. The site is 4951m2, which the applicants contend is an uncommonly large area for a house. The Court did not inquire into why this large of an area was requested, and the applicants submit that this failure amounted to an error of law, as the Court failed to ensure that the order was within the parameters of the s 328 jurisdiction. [13] The applicants argue that there is a formula for de...