Search Results

1. ENVC Hearing 27Jul15 AC suppl evidence Kala Sivaguru [pdf, 111 KB]

   ...the threat classification system. NZCPS Policy 11 also requires the avoidance of adverse effects on at risk species. 10. While I agree that the nesting sites identified by Ms Fitchett fall outside the proposed decking area, disturbance from human and boat activity would increase in the Bay due to the Marina proposal. This would cause some level of disturbance to blue penguins' use around the Bay. I also consider it is relevant to record that, of the two locations referred t...

2. Rafiq v Commissioner of Police (Costs) [2013] NZHRRT 31 [pdf, 40 KB]

   1 IN THE HUMAN RIGHTS REVIEW TRIBUNAL [2013] NZHRRT 31 Reference No. HRRT 032/2011 UNDER THE PRIVACY ACT 1993 IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION BY THE DEFENDANT FOR COSTS BETWEEN RAZDAN RAFIQ PLAINTIFF AND COMMISSIONER OF POLICE DEFENDANT AT WELLINGTON BEFORE: Mr RPG Haines QC, Chairperson Dr SJ Hickey, Member Dr AD Trlin, Member REPRESENTATION: Mr Rafiq in person (no appearance) Mr E Child and Mr T Hallett-Hook for Def...

3. BORA Ngati Porou Claims Settlement Bill [pdf, 282 KB]

   ...would preclude judicial review of a previous determination of rights (for example, the East Coast Settlement Report of the Waitangi Tribunal). This limits the right under s 27(2), but the limitation is justifiable under section 5. The United Nations Human Rights Committee considered that the exclusion of judicial review under the Fisheries Settlement, in the context of a negotiated settlement, was consistent with the right of access to the courts under art 14(1) of the International Cove...

4. BORA Maungaharuru-Tangitū Hapū Claims Settlement Bill [pdf, 286 KB]

   ...Rights Act. Excluding subsequent challenge is a legitimate incident of the negotiated settlement of claims. 8. Any limit on minority rights under section 20 of the Bill of Rights Act would be justified on the same basis. 9. The United Nations Human Rights Committee upheld a similar exclusion under the 1992 fisheries settlement. The Committee found that the exclusion was consistent with articles 14 and 27 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which are comparabl...

5. Re Apostolakis No. 3 (Refusal of Name Suppression) [2018] NZHRRT 4 [pdf, 223 KB]

   1 IN THE HUMAN RIGHTS REVIEW TRIBUNAL [2018] NZHRRT 4 Reference No. HRRT 072/2015 BETWEEN KATHY APOSTOLAKIS Plaintiff AND ATTORNEY-GENERAL Defendant Reference No. HRRT 078/2016 BETWEEN KATHY APOSTOLAKIS Plaintiff AND ATTORNEY-GENERAL Defendant AT WELLINGTON BEFORE: Mr RPG Haines QC, Chairperson Ms GJ Goodwin, Member Mr BK Neeson JP, Member REPRESENTATION: Mrs K Apostolakis in person DATE...

6. BORA Port Nicholson Block (Taranaki Whanui ki Te Upoko o Te Ika) Claims Settlement Bill [pdf, 283 KB]

   ...v Attorney-General [2008] 1 NZLR 318. 5.2 In that context, exclusion of jurisdiction in respect of the claims, settlement deed and the Bill is an integral part of the settlement process. 6. I note, in this respect, the view of the United Nations Human Rights Committee that a similar exclusion under the Fisheries Settlement, in the context of a negotiated settlement, was consistent with the right of access to the courts under art 14(1) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political...

7. BORA Children Young Persons & Their Families (Youth Courts Jurisdiction & Orders) Amendment Bill [pdf, 304 KB]

   ...there is no penalty for non-compliance. I also do not consider that the making of such an order raises an issue of discrimination in terms of s 19(1) of the Bill of Rights Act on grounds of family status, which includes, under s 21(1)(l)(iv) of the Human Rights Act, "being a relative of a particular person", as the making of an order against the caregiver of a young person is based upon that particular personal responsibility. 10. It may give rise to an effective detention and...

8. BORA Vehicle Confiscation and Seizure Bill [pdf, 284 KB]

   ...applied R v Smith [1987] 1 SCR 1045, 1070 and R v Latimer [2001] 1 SCR 3, [77] 2. See, for example, Belcher v Chief Executive of the Department of Corrections [2007] 1 NZLR 507, [35]ff, and, more broadly, R Clayton & H Tomlinson (eds) The Law of Human Rights (2ed: Oxford, 2009)[11.30]ff and [11.358]ff. 3. See A Butler & P Butler The New Zealand Bill of Rights Act: A Commentary (LexisNexis, 2005), [21.6.4] and also Air Canada v The United Kingdom 20 EHRR 150. In additio...

9. BORA Courts (Remote Participation) Bill [pdf, 286 KB]

   ...The use of AVL for the appearance of an accused person at trial appears to be uncommon in comparable jurisdictions, at least without the accused person’s consent, and does not appear to have been considered in New Zealand. The European Court of Human Rights has, however, indicated that whether such appearance is consistent with fair trial protections will depend upon the particular circumstances, including the stage of proceedings, possible disadvantage to either party and measures take...

10. [2019] NZEmpC 69 Goleman Wellington Cleaning Ltd v Nicolle [pdf, 310 KB]

    ...2 Nicolle v Goleman Wellington Cleaning Ltd [2019] NZERA 113. 3 Goleman Wellington Cleaning Ltd v Nicolle [2019] NZEmpC 51. [7] The application was supported by an affidavit from David Fuimaono, Goleman’s National Human Resources and Compliance Manager. The reason given for this delay in seeking to challenge the costs determination was explained by Mr Fuimaono as an error by Goleman’s advocate. Mr Fuimaono said he instructed Mr Pa’u to challenge t