Search Results

1. 2015 Ministry of Justice annual report - our performance [pdf, 509 KB]

   Our performance Statement of responsibility I am responsible, as Secretary for Justice and Chief Executive of the Ministry of Justice (the Ministry), for: • the preparation of the Ministry’s financial statements, and statements of expenses and capital expenditure, and for the judgements expressed in them • having in place a system of internal controls designed to provide reasonable assurance as to the integrity and reliability of financial reporting • ensuring that end-of-yea

2. 2021-05-26 Transcript (up until 3.15pm on day 32) [pdf, 2.4 MB]

   BEFORE THE ENVIRONMENT COURT AT CHRISTCHURCH ENV-2020-CJC-127 IN THE MATTER OF The Resource Management Act 1991 AND Of a notice of motion under section 149T(2) to decide proposed Plan Change 7 to the Regional Plan: Water for Otago (referred to the Environment Court by the Minister for the Environment under section 142(2)(b) of the Act) OTAGO REGIONAL COUNCIL Applicant Hearing Commenced: 17 May 2021 in Dunedin Court: Environment Judge J E Borthwick Comm

3. 2021-05-26 Transcript (up until 3.15pm on day 32) [pdf, 2.4 MB]

   BEFORE THE ENVIRONMENT COURT AT CHRISTCHURCH ENV-2020-CJC-127 IN THE MATTER OF The Resource Management Act 1991 AND Of a notice of motion under section 149T(2) to decide proposed Plan Change 7 to the Regional Plan: Water for Otago (referred to the Environment Court by the Minister for the Environment under section 142(2)(b) of the Act) OTAGO REGIONAL COUNCIL Applicant Hearing Commenced: 17 May 2021 in Dunedin Court: Environment Judge J E Borthwick Comm

4. Stock v Morris - Wainui 2D2B (2012) 41 Taitokerau MB 121 (41 TTK 121) [pdf, 259 KB]

   ...specific aspects of the s 18(1)(a) jurisdiction that arise here. [32] First, there is the question of the legal effect of a s 18(1)(a) order, in particular, whether a house remains a fixture or becomes a chattel. There are competing views on this. Judgments of this Court 13 and the Māori Appellate Court 14 have commented that a s 18(1)(a) order has the effect of converting a house into a chattel. However, on a separate occasion the Māori Appellate Court expressed the contrar...

5. Otago Standards Committee v Saunderson-Warner [2013] NZLCDT 15 [pdf, 231 KB]

   ...did and I don’t know when they expire ... Q: It warranted an inquiry didn’t it? A: Well, I wasn’t aware of the issue about this car ...” [37] The majority was unimpressed by the degree of sophistry employed by the practitioner in this line of questioning. We consider it showed very poor judgment. Ms Saunderson-Warner was evasive when pressed on the issue of a distress warrant having been issued, suggesting that the firm had merely “assisted in the drafting” of the...

6. [2019] NZEmpC 40 Berry v The Chief Executive of the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment [pdf, 328 KB]

   ...AND THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE MINISTRY OF BUSINESS, INNOVATION AND EMPLOYMENT Defendant Hearing: 10-11 December 2018 (Heard at Auckland) Appearances: S Berry, plaintiff in person E Tait, counsel for defendant Judgment: 5 April 2019 JUDGMENT OF JUDGE M E PERKINS Introduction [1] These proceedings have been removed to the Court by way of a minute of the Employment Relations Authority (the Authority) dated 1 June 2018. In view of...

7. 20240806-FINAL-Proactive-Release-Sentencing-Reform-Tranche-One.pdf [pdf, 2.1 MB]

   ...discounts should be linked to the stage at which an early guilty plea is entered, however the Act does not provide guidance on how this should be applied in practice. 67. In 2009/10, a sliding scale for early guilty pleas was introduced by a guideline judgment from the Court of Appeal in Hessell v R [2009] NZCA 450, which provided for: 67.1. a 33% discount for an early guilty plea entered at the earliest opportunity incorporating a reduction for remorse; 67.2. a 20% discount for enter...

8. CAC 20003 v Weldrand [2013] NZREADT 78 [pdf, 62 KB]

   ...the anonymous email had a sinister element in all the circumstances. [30] The licensee accepted that it was stupid of him to have sent the email in those circumstances but maintained that it did not suggest violence and was “a grave error of judgement” by him. It was put to him that his conduct was very unprofessional. The licensee emphasised that his sending the email had been the one time in ten years of work as a real estate agent when he did not act calmly and professionally...

9. Eichelbaum v CAC303 & Anor (ruling) [2016] NZREADT 3 [pdf, 171 KB]

   ...justice (s 84(1) (REAA). 74. It is also relevant to note that hearings before a Standards Committee of the Law Society are conducted on the papers unless the Committee otherwise directs (see s 153(1) Lawyers & Conveyancers Act 2006). 75. As the judgment of Kos J in Hong v Auckland Standards Committee No. 3 notes, if there are concerns over a practitioner (licensee) response a face to face hearing should take place. The appellant could have insisted on that but did not. He is the...

10. Huang v Auckland Council [2012] NZWHT Auckland 26 [pdf, 135 KB]

    ...DETERMINATION (Claim by Auckland Council, First Respondent against Mr Owen Lamb, the Third Respondent) Adjudicator: P J Andrew Page 2 INTRODUCTION [1] In a determination dated 16 March 2012 the Tribunal, by consent, entered judgement against the Auckland Council, the first respondent, in the sum of $340,000. The Auckland Council conceded liability for substantial defects in construction as set out in the claimant’s statement of claim of 28 June 2011. This incl...