Search Results

1. Supplementary Government Response to Law Commissions report [pdf, 479 KB]

   ...Legislation Advisory Committee for its Guidelines, as agreed in interim response 4, 9, 15, 24, 34, 85, 92.1, 94, 95, 96, 98, 108, 113, 118, 120.2, 123, 124 The interim Government response invited the Privacy Commissioner to consult the Ministry of Justice and relevant partner agencies and submit a plan for developing the guidance and education material recommended by the Law Commission 116 Transferred to the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Enterprise 121 Not for Government 3...

2. LCRO 166/2020 GM - Application for review of a prosecutorial decision (18 December 2020) [pdf, 174 KB]

   ...On 6 December 2019, the Lawyers Complaints Service received a report from the New Zealand Law Society Trust Account Inspectorate. [5] The report identified a number of concerns regarding Mr GM’s management of his firm’s trust account. [6] Matters identified by the inspector as raising concern included: (a) 13 transfers from the firm’s trust account to the firm’s practice account, without evidence of Mr GM holding authority for the transfers; and (b) concern that Mr GM was...

3. OIA-119799.pdf [pdf, 4.2 MB]

   ...legislative limits. In Appendix 4, we outline two examples, Police, and Court Security Officers (CSOs). 56. Police and CSOs have important public and statutory functions. Police are the primary law enforcement branch of the state and are responsible for matters such as keeping the peace, maintaining public safety, law enforcement, crime prevention. CSOs are responsible for the security of the courts and the independent judiciary. 11 Andrew Butler and Petra Butler The New Zealand Bill of...

4. BORA Sale and Supply of Liquor and Liquor Enforcement Bill [pdf, 312 KB]

   ...of a regulatory character. Further, and noting the observations of the Supreme Court in Hansen, above, the steps taken by a licence-holder to establish lawful age and, particularly, whether a proof of age document was provided and was believed are matters peculiarly within his or her competence. 38. It follows that no issue of inconsistency arises in respect of cll 36 and 38. Seizure and forfeiture of liquor - no unreasonable search and seizure issue 39. The Bill also amends the Summar...

5. BORA Patents Bill [pdf, 317 KB]

   ...disproportionate. 47. For these reasons outlined above we consider that the limitations in the Bill on the presumption of innocence under section 25(c) of the Bill of Rights are justified under section 5 of that Act. Section 27(1) – Right to natural justice 48. Clause 135 (Presumption that product produced by infringing process) states that if a patented process is a process for obtaining a new product, the same product produced by a person is presumed in infringement proceedings to...

6. [2021] NZACC 68 - Robinson v ACC (27 April 2021) [pdf, 223 KB]

   ...Corporation v Peck, the majority of the Court of Appeal found that the Corporation had the discretionary power permanently to decline the respondent’s entitlements for the period of her unreasonable refusal to submit to a medical examination.1 Justice McGrath stated:2 The purpose of s 116(3) in this context is to provide a mechanism that the Corporation can use in appropriate cases to ensure compliance by persons who have entitlements with their duties to keep the Corporati...

7. 20220928-NZBORA-Advice-Deposit-Takers-Bill.pdf [pdf, 218 KB]

   ...conclusion, we have considered the consistency of the Bill with s 14 (freedom of expression), s 21 (freedom from unreasonable search and seizure), s 25(c) (the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty according to law), and s 27 (right to justice). Our analysis is set out below. The Bill 4. The Deposit Takers Bill merges the currently separate regulatory frameworks for registered banks and licensed non-bank deposit takers under a single regime. The Bill repeals and re...

8. EL v IN Ltd [2022] NZDT 149 (18 August 2022) [pdf, 165 KB]

   ...of the Tribunal. Specifically, the Referee conducted the proceedings (or a Tribunal investigator carried out an enquiry) in a way that was unfair and prejudiced the result of the proceedings. This means you consider there was a breach of natural justice, as a result of procedural unfairness that affected the result of the proceedings. PLEASE NOTE: Parties need to be aware they cannot appeal a Referee’s finding of fact. Where a Referee has made a decision on the issues raised as part...

9. FB Ltd v HE & QE [2023] NZDT 676 (6 December 2023) [pdf, 172 KB]

   ...of the Tribunal. Specifically, the Referee conducted the proceedings (or a Tribunal investigator carried out an enquiry) in a way that was unfair and prejudiced the result of the proceedings. This means you consider there was a breach of natural justice, as a result of procedural unfairness that affected the result of the proceedings. PLEASE NOTE: Parties need to be aware they cannot appeal a Referee’s finding of fact. Where a Referee has made a decision on the issues raised as part...

10. TD Ltd v SC Ltd [2023] NZDT 624 (21 November 2023) [pdf, 195 KB]

    ...of the Tribunal. Specifically, the Referee conducted the proceedings (or a Tribunal investigator carried out an enquiry) in a way that was unfair and prejudiced the result of the proceedings. This means you consider there was a breach of natural justice, as a result of procedural unfairness that affected the result of the proceedings. PLEASE NOTE: Parties need to be aware they cannot appeal a Referee’s finding of fact. Where a Referee has made a decision on the issues raised as part...