Search Results

1. Singh v Kumar [2016] NZIACDT 18 (04 April 2016) [pdf, 103 KB]

   ...to file the application at all. It was reasonable for Mr Kumar to give absolute priority to the late instruction, and regard filing a valid application as essential. The Registrar did not challenge 6 Mr Kumar’s evidence inevitable human frailty that caused his memory lapse, and he did not have the time to make the inquiries he would usually make. Accordingly, I cannot find Mr Kumar’s conduct fell short of the professional standards required; he was not negligent. [27] I...

2. Auckland Standards Committee v Murray [2015] NZLCDT 6 [pdf, 142 KB]

   ...conclusion that Ms Murray is not a fit and proper person to practice the law. Further, it is submitted “if the conviction is not at that level then it is necessary to consider the conduct underlying the conviction and whether it discloses “human frailty” warranting the person’s disqualification from professional life”. [8] For Ms Murray, Mr Pyke reminded the Tribunal that the conviction was for a summary offence in which culpability, as found by the District Court, was ...

3. [2014] NZEmpC 16 Gapuzan v Pratt Whitney Air New Zealand Services second interlocutory [pdf, 49 KB]

   ...further action was required. [12] On 9 January 2012, ACC declined the plaintiff’s claim and the plaintiff became aware that the defendant had not returned the employer questionnaire to ACC. He contacted the mediator who contacted the defendant’s Human Resources Manager on 10 January 2012. She arranged for the questionnaire to be sent to ACC that day. ACC then reviewed the plaintiff’s claim in light of the answers given in the questionnaire and confirmed its decision to decline th...

4. BORA Securities Legislation Bill [pdf, 122 KB]

   ...CONCLUSION 31. In accordance with your instructions, we attach a copy of this opinion for referral to the Minister of Justice. Roger Palairet Acting Chief Legal Counsel Office of Legal Counsel Stuart Beresford Senior Legal Adviser Bill of Rights/Human Rights Team cc Minister of Justice Footnotes 1 R v Keegstra [1990] 3 SCR 697,729,826. 2 RJR MacDonald v Attorney-General of Canada (1995) 127 DLR (4th)1 3 Advice dated 31 October 2001. 4 Clause 30 – New Subpart 3...

5. BORA Land Transport (Road Safety and Other Matters) Amendment Bill [pdf, 361 KB]

   ...Act into the Land Transport Act 1998. CONSISTENCY WITH SECTION 19(1) OF THE BILL OF RIGHTS ACT Section 19(1) of the Bill of Rights Act affirms that everyone has the right to be free from discrimination on the grounds of discrimination in the Human Rights Act 1993, which include age. A legislative provision may give rise to prima facie discrimination where:[1] a) it draws a distinction based on one of the prohibited grounds of discrimination, and b) the distinction involves di...

6. BORA Waste Minimisation (Solids) Bill [pdf, 410 KB]

   ...CONCLUSION 36. We have concluded that the Bill is consistent with the rights and freedoms contained in the Bill of Rights Act. Jeff Orr Chief Legal Counsel Office of Legal Counsel Stuart Beresford Principal Adviser, Bill of Rights/Human Rights Public Law Group Footnotes 1 Slaight Communications v Davidson 59 DLR (4th) 416; Wooley v Maynard 430 US 705 (1977) 2 [1989] 1 SCR 927 3 R v Jarvis 219 DLR (4th) 233 4 New Zealand Stock Exchange v Commissioner of Inland...

7. BORA Local Electoral (Māori Representation) Amendment Bill [pdf, 274 KB]

   ...before an appointment is made. 2 CONSISTENCY WITH SECTION 19(1) OF THE BILL OF RIGHTS ACT 7. Section 19(1) of the Bill of Rights Act affirms that everyone has the right to be free from discrimination on the grounds of discrimination in the Human Rights Act 1993, which include race. Legislation may give rise to discrimination under s 19(1) of the Bill of Right Act if the legislation draws a distinction based on one of the prohibited grounds of discrimination and the distincti...

8. Tai Rakena v Corrections [2017] NZHRRT 24 [pdf, 151 KB]

   1 IN THE HUMAN RIGHTS REVIEW TRIBUNAL [2017] NZHRRT 24 Reference No. HRRT 058/2016 UNDER THE PRIVACY ACT 1993 BETWEEN MICHAEL TAI RAKENA PLAINTIFF AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS DEFENDANT AT WHANGANUI BEFORE: Mr RPG Haines QC, Chairperson Mr R K Musuku, Member Mr B K Neeson JP, Member REPRESENTATION: Mr M Tai Rakena in person Ms V McCall and Ms G Taylor for defendant DATE OF HEARING: 22 June 2017 DATE...

9. Establishment of Canterbury Earthquakes Insurance Tribunal (2) [pdf, 402 KB]

   ...as still at Tribunal level. • If parties still likely to seek to refer to the courts, may just add an additional administrative layer and not speed up resolution. First appeal directly to High Court, as of right Copyright Tribunal Human Rights Tribunal Tax Review Authority (depending on amount at issue) • For small number of claims (under $350,000) removes one level of appeal. • Risk that parties automatically appeal to the High Court, meaning Tribunal...

10. [2018] NZEnvC 142 Gisborne District Council v O'Connell [pdf, 664 KB]

    ...the analysis by Hill Laboratories. She advised that the samples showed high levels of Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH) which is indicative of heavy fuel oils and lube oils. She deposed that: TPH in the soil presents potential environmental and human health risks based on exposure pathways and receptors. Potential exposure pathways for the site include soil ingestion/dermal contact or usage of surface water/groundwater. Potential receptors for the site include people living / worki...