Search Results

1. Wright v CAC 10056 & Woods [2011] NZREADT 21 [pdf, 169 KB]

   ...fitness to be a licensee”. [37] The principles applying to the exercise of appellate jurisdiction have been considered by the Supreme Court in Austin, Nichols & Co Inc v Stitchting Lodestar [2007] NZSC 103, [2008] 2 NZLR 141. According to the judgment, a Court considering an appeal from a lower Court is not obliged to defer to the reasons of the decision appealed from. Rather, the appellate Court has the responsibility of arriving at its own assessment of the merits of the cas...

2. [2014] NZEmpC 53 NZ Meatworkers Union v Alliance Group Ltd [pdf, 184 KB]

   ...INCORPORATED Plaintiff AND ALLIANCE GROUP LIMITED Defendant Hearing: 4, 5 and 6 June 2013 Heard at Invercargill Appearances: P B Churchman QC, counsel for the plaintiff K G Smith, counsel for the defendant Judgment: 7 April 2014 JUDGMENT OF JUDGE A A COUCH [1] The plaintiff (the Union) and the defendant (Alliance) have been parties to a series of collective agreements. This judgment decides a dispute about the interpretation of...

3. [2022] NZEmpC 164 Zink v Board of Trustees of Southland Boys High School [pdf, 321 KB]

   ...BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF SOUTHLAND BOYS HIGH SCHOOL Defendant Hearing: 12 July 2022 (Heard at Invercargill) Appearances: P Cranney, counsel for the plaintiff J Copeland and J Greenfield, counsel for the defendant Judgment: 7 September 2022 JUDGMENT OF JUDGE B A CORKILL Introduction [1] The issue for determination is whether Mr Theo Zink, who was employed at all material times by the Board of Trustees of Southland Boys High School (SBHS...

4. 20240625-Reinstating-Three-Strikes-Amendment-Bill.pdf [pdf, 5.3 MB]

   ...relevant to assessing the human rights consistency of the proposed three-strikes scheme is s 9, and specifically the proscription on disproportionately severe punishment. 23 . The Supreme Court's decision in Fitzgerald is the most significant judgment regarding the previous three-strikes scheme.29 The Supreme Court, relying on the interpretive duty ins 6 of the NZBORA and other interpretive principles, read into the scheme an implied restriction that on the third strike the maximum...

5. [2017] NZEnvC 092 Golden Bay Grandstand v Heritage New Zealand [pdf, 2.7 MB]

   BEFORE THE ENVIRONMENT COURT INTHE MAnER AND BETWEEN AND INTHEMAnER AND BETWEEN AND AND Decision No. [2017] NZEnvC 9 2 of the Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga Act 2014 of an appeal under section 58 of the Act GOLDEN BAY GRANDSTAND COMMUNITY TRUST (INCORPORATED) (ENV-2016-WLG-000065) Appellant HERITAGE NEW ZEALAND POUHERE TAONGA Respondent of the Resource Management Act 1991 of an application under section 316 of the Act GOLDEN BAY GRANDSTAND COMM

6. Appendix-10_Michael-Thompson_s87F-Report_Water-Take-and-Allocation_28-April-2023.pdf [pdf, 893 KB]

   Section 87F Report – Ōtaki to north of Levin Highway Project (Ō2NL Project) Prepared by Michael Thompson – Water take and allocation 1 IN THE MATTER of the Resource Management Act 1991 AND IN THE MATTER of applications by Waka Kotahi NZ Transport Agency (Waka Kotahi) to Manawatū-Whanganui Regional Council and Greater Wellington Regional Council for resource consents to enable the construction, operation and maintenance of new state highway, shared

7. [2010] NZEmpC 88 Coy v Commissioner of Police [pdf, 67 KB]

   ...POLICE Defendant Hearing: 5 July 2010 (Heard at Wellington) Appearances: Scott Fairclough, Counsel for Plaintiff (by video conference from Christchurch) Antoinette Russell and Sally McKechnie, Counsel for Defendant (in Wellington) Judgment: 8 July 2010 INTERLOCUTORY JUDGMENT OF CHIEF JUDGE GL COLGAN [1] There are four preliminary issues for decision in this proceeding which is to go to trial next month. Psychologists’ notes privilege [2] The first is an...

8. The Trustees of the Tauwhao Te Ngare Trust v Shaw - Tauwhao Te Ngare Block and a preliminary decision of the Chief Judge at 2013 CJ 567 [2014] Māori Appellate Court MB 394 (2014 APPEAL 394) [pdf, 377 KB]

   ...Hearing: 13 May 2014 at 2014 Maori Appellate Court MB 88-131 (Heard at Hamilton) Court: Deputy Chief Judge Fox (Presiding) Judge L R Harvey, Judge MJ Doogan Appearances: J Koning for the Appellants D Shaw in person Judgment: 23 December 2014 RESERVED JUDGMENT OF THE MĀORI APPELLATE COURT Copy to: Mr J Koning, Koning Webster Lawyers, PO Box 11120, Papamoa 3151 john@kwlaw.co.nz mailto:john@kwlaw.co...

9. [2020] NZEmpC 139 KiwiRail Ltd v Mobbs [pdf, 450 KB]

   ...ZEALAND INCORPORATED Second Defendant Hearing: 9, 10 and 23, 24 June 2020 (Heard at Wellington) Appearances: P David QC and A Russell, counsel for the plaintiff P Cranney, counsel for the first and second defendants Judgment: 2 September 2020 JUDGMENT OF JUDGE B A CORKILL Introduction [1] At issue is the correct meaning of a retirement clause. Is its meaning plain, or is it such that it requires either corrective interpretation, or rect...

10. Abraham v Auckland City Council [pdf, 111 KB]

    ...by First Respondent” (dated 25 May 2007) was not forthcoming, but in the interests of completeness I briefly review below relevant established legal principles which underline council responsibility, and apply them to the facts. [47] The judgment in Stieller v Porirua City Council [1983] NZLR 628 usefully sets the tone: “The standard of care in all cases of negligence is that of the reasonable man (sic). The defendant, and indeed any other council, is not an insurer and...