Search Results

1. Ram v Aasa [2016] NZIACDT 9 (04 February 2016) [pdf, 92 KB]

   ...timely updates (clause 3(a) of the 2010 Code). [6.8.3] Failing to confirm in writing when she ceased working part way through the immigration process (clause 3(b) of the 2010 Code). [6.8.4] Failing to return passports and other personal documents, on request, and without delay in a secure manner (clause 1.3(b) of the 2010 Code). The responses [7] Neither Ms Aasa nor the complainant responded to the statement of complaint. The standard notice to the parties does not require a response...

2. Recording Industry Association of New Zealand v CAL2013-E000737 [2013] NZCOP 16 [pdf, 158 KB]

   ...initial detection notice, issued on 18 September 2012; [b] a warning notice, issued on 19 November 2012; and [c] an enforcement notice, issued on 18 February 2013. [7] The Application, together with detailed submissions and an authorisation of agent form, was filed with the Tribunal on 22 March 2013. The Applicant sought an award of $543.42, including a deterrent sum of $250. [8] On 10 April 2013, the Tribunal wrote to the Respondent, sending to him a copy of the Application and a...

3. Mr C 23 June 2015 NZSHD 5 [pdf, 42 KB]

   ...clearly indicate that the applicant is not a fit and proper person to hold a certificate. [13] A copy of the Police Objection was sent to the applicant on 25 May 2015. At the same time he was advised of his options which included the possibility of requesting a ‘Hearing in Person’ (hearing) of his case under s.26 of the Act or making written submissions in support of his application. [14] The applicant responded by email on 27 May 2015 requesting a hearing. [15] When advised by...

4. Kahukura v Moore – Manukōrihi 1B Section 2 (2013) 299 Aotea MB 153 (299 AOT 153) [pdf, 111 KB]

   ...and their 12 children were named as the remainder persons. Procedural history [8] The application was first heard before Judge Reeves on 24 February 2012.4 [9] The matter was then set down to be heard on 22 June 2012 me. The applicant requested an adjournment to seek legal advice and to make sure that all the beneficiaries were informed. The respondent spoke in opposition to the application. Judge Reeves raised the possibility of establishing an ahu whenua trust over the bl...

5. AP v Standards Committee X LCRO 317 / 2012 (15 August 2013) [pdf, 67 KB]

   ...of misconduct, a finding that only the Tribunal could make, and also noting that the Applicant had failed to respond or comply with a requirement pursuant to s 147(2)(a) to produce for the Committee’s inspection certain documents that had been requested. Review application [11] The grounds cited by the Applicant for review were bias, procedural unfairness, error in fact and law, wrong in determining the matter reached the necessary threshold of the New Zealand Law Society Discip...

6. 2017 NZSSAA 042 (24 July 2017) [pdf, 107 KB]

   ...submissions by 9 November 2016 in response to the Ministry’s Section 12K Report and supplementary report filed on 5 August 2016. 2 [5] On 22 November 2016 the case manager wrote to Ms XXXX noting that she had not provided the submissions requested by the Authority and advised Ms XXXX that if her submissions were not filed by Tuesday 29 November 2016 the matter would be determined. [6] On 29 November 2016 the Authority received an e-mail from Peter Eastgate, coun...

7. ENV-2017-AKL-000155 The National Trading Company of New Zealand Limited v Auckland Council [pdf, 537 KB]

   ...NTC attaches the following documents to this Notice of Appeal: (a) A copy of the Hearings Panel recommendations version of the Precinct Plan (Annexure A) (b) A copy of the relevant parts of the Hearings Panel’s reports to the Council which formed part of its Recommendation (Annexure B). (c) A copy of the relevant parts of the Decision (Annexure C). (d) A copy of the High Court decision, Bunnings Limited v Auckland Unitary Plan Independent Hearings Panel [2017] NZHC 2141 (Anne...

8. ENV-2017-AKL-000156 C N Barbour Family Trust v Auckland Council [pdf, 1.8 MB]

   ...Independent Hearing Panel failed to identify the impacts of the revised precinct plan beyond the Precinct boundary, and the decision has effectively pre-empted the public consultation and submission process, and analysis, that was intended to inform the final alignment and classification. The new alignment has an immediate and direct impact on the underlying zoning pattern, as the arterial roads form logical zone boundaries within the precinct. (h) The amended alignment and clas...

9. BORA Public Finance (State Sector Management) Bill [pdf, 48 KB]

   ...appear to be inconsistent with the Bill of Rights Act. FULLER ANALYSIS: THE BILL OF RIGHTS ACT ISSUE RAISED BY THE BILL Section 14 - the right to freedom of expression 10. The right to freedom of expression in section 14 extends to all forms of communication that attempt to express an idea or meaning.[1] The right extends to include conduct[2] as well as silence, and may apply irrespective of the content or form of the expression.[3] 11. A number of provisions in the Bil...

10. BORA Employment (Pay Equity and Equal Pay) Bill [pdf, 304 KB]

    ...existing and prevention of future sex discrimination in remuneration and other terms and conditions of employment c. set out the different processes by which employees may make claims relating to sex discrimination, and d. re-enact, in an up-to-date form, the relevant provisions of the Equal Pay Act. 6. To that end, the Bill sets up processes for employees to make the following claims: a. equal pay claims, which are claims alleging that the rate of remuneration paid discriminates on...