Search Results

1. [2022] NZEnvC 227 Nga Kaitiaki O Te Awa O Ngaruroro [pdf, 1.1 MB]

   ...argued by various Māori landowner representatives, groups and individuals that there be no water conservation order. In 13 addition, we also consider whether and how any water conservation order could provide for Māori values in line with s 199(2)(b)(v) “historical, spiritual or cultural purposes” and (c) “outstanding significance in accordance with tikanga Maori”. [22] We also consider the report of the Special Tribunal and any draft water conservation order...

2. Bell v Churton - Mataimoana (2019) 410 Aotea MB 244 (410 AOT 244) [pdf, 352 KB]

   ...provisional determination, Judge Doogan in Te Ohu Kaimoana Trustee Ltd v Te Runanga Nui o Te Aupouri provided guidance on the relevant factors and principles that would apply in that case which concerned customary interests relevant to the coastline:11 [8] This provisional determination is issued in response to the request of the parties. I would not have done so but for the fact that there was unanimous support. [9] The guidance here recorded is provisional in nature. It does not d...

3. Matsuoka v E Tū Incorporated (Preservation Orders) [2018] NZHRRT 49 [pdf, 824 KB]

   ...Information sought by the plaintiff relates to events occurring as early as 2011. b The Tribunal is unlikely to hear and determine the plaintiffs case before the end of 2019. c In light of the amount of time that will elapse before the plaintiff receives Judgment, there is a real risk that the Information will be inadvertently destroyed and the plaintiffs remedies will be rendered nugatory. d Taking steps to preserve the Information is proportionate and appropriate in the circumstances...

4. LCRO 96/2017 AA v BB (29 November 2019) [pdf, 203 KB]

   ...Court declined the remedies sought by the OA, but on appeal by the OA, the Court of Appeal unanimously 1 Pursuant to Court orders. 2 The Official Assignee v [VOI] Ltd [2015] NZHC 1416 [High Court judgment] at [7]. 3 reversed the High Court’s decision and declared that [VOI] was not entitled to cancel the agreement.3 Complaint [13] Mr BB lodged a complaint with the Lawyers Complaints Service on 25 October 2016. He sought...

5. Chapman v Aotearoa Resorts Ltd - Tokaanu Māori Township 2nd Residue Trust (2010) 257 Aotea MB 62 (257 AOT 62) [pdf, 245 KB]

   ...July 2009 238 Aotea MB 258, 19 August 2009 241 Aotea MB 3, 25 September 2009 Appearances: Messrs T Roberts & R Laurenson, for the applicants Mr G Paine for the First and Second Respondents Ms Verbison for Third and Fourth Respondents Judgment: 4 October 2010 RESERVED JUDGMENT OF JUDGE L R HARVEY Solicitors: Kiely Thomson Caisley, Wellington for the Applicants John W Key, Fielding for the First and Second Respondents Fitzherbert Rowe, Palmerston North for the Thir...

6. OIA-102423-v2.pdf [pdf, 2.2 MB]

   ...Police Conduct Authority Act 1988 (IPCA Act); that is, the absence of an explicit, unambiguous privative clause statutorily ousting the right to challenge actions and decisions of the Authority by way of judicial review. 2. The recent High Court judgment of Gault Jin Deliu v The Independent Police Conduct Authority1, dismissing the Authority's argument thats 33 of the IPCA Act is such a privative clause, has far­ reaching implications for the work of the Authority. Considering...

7. OIA-102423.pdf [pdf, 2.2 MB]

   ...Police Conduct Authority Act 1988 (IPCA Act); that is, the absence of an explicit, unambiguous privative clause statutorily ousting the right to challenge actions and decisions of the Authority by way of judicial review. 2. The recent High Court judgment of Gault Jin Deliu v The Independent Police Conduct Authority1, dismissing the Authority's argument thats 33 of the IPCA Act is such a privative clause, has far­ reaching implications for the work of the Authority. Considering...

8. Family violence & the pro-arrest policy: a literature review [pdf, 214 KB]

   Family violence and the pro-arrest policy: a literature review Prepared for the Ministry of Justice by Dr Sue Carswell 2 DISCLAIMER This research was commissioned by the Ministry of Justice. The report has been prepared by the author and the views expressed in it are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of the Ministry of Justice. First published in October 2006 by the Ministry of Justice PO Box 180 Wellington New Zealand © Crown Copyright ISBN 0-478-29

9. [2019] NZEmpC 49 Mathews v Bay of Plenty District Health Board [pdf, 449 KB]

   ...February 2019 (Heard at Auckland) Court: Appearances: Judge B A Corkill Judge J C Holden Judge M E Perkins P Cranney, counsel for plaintiff M Beech, C Goodspeed and T Carlisle, counsel for defendant Judgment: 2 May 2019 JUDGMENT OF THE FULL COURT Introduction [1] At issue is whether Dr Timothy Mathews, a long-serving part-time employee of the Bay of Plenty District Health Board (the DHB), was contractually entitled to a...

10. Teina Pora compensation claim innocence report [pdf, 9 MB]

    REPORT FOR MINISTER OF JUSTICE ON COMPENSATION CLAIM BY TEINA ANTHONY PORA BY HON RODNEY HANSEN CNZM QC TABLE OF CONTENTS (1) INTRODUCTION ............................................................... " ....................................... 5 (2) A SHORT HISTORY .............................. ..... .......... .. .............. , ....................................... 7 (3) APPROACH TO APPLICATION ............................................ , ..........................