8024 items matching your search terms
... Reviewing reports Any agent fees Reporting to client. Section 38 – Forensic Report $150 For: Liaising, obtaining and reviewing section 38 Forensic Report Any agent fees Reporting to client. Restorative Justice Report $150 For: Obtaining Restorative Justice Report in preparation for sentencing Any agent fees Reporting to client. Written sentencing submissions $250 For: Limited to preparing sentencing submissions und...
Justice Sector Justice Sector Forecast 2011-2021 30 September 2011 Justice Sector Forecast 2011-2021 Page 2 Table of contents 1. Executive Summary ........................................................................................................ 5 1.1. Overview .................................................................................................................................. 5 1.2. Summ
CHRISTOPHER SCOTT ROY v BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF TAMAKI COLLEGE NZEmpC AUCKLAND [2014] NZEmpC 153 [20 August 2014] IN THE EMPLOYMENT COURT AUCKLAND [2014] NZEmpC 153 ARC 92/13 IN THE MATTER OF a challenge to a determination of the Employment Relations Authority AND IN THE MATTER of an application to strike out the proceeding AND IN THE MATTER of an application for leave to raise a personal grievance out of time BETWEEN CHRISTOPHER...
...the Court of the existence of an error of fact and/or law by the Authority in its determination. (d) Making such an election does not dictate the way in which the appeal is to be heard. There may be evidence or further evidence about the matters at issue in the non de novo challenge. It may become necessary for the Court to make its own decision, as required by s 183 of the Act. (e) To succeed on a non de novo challenge, a plaintiff must establish one or more of the a...
IN THE DISTRICT COURT AT WELLINGTON I TE KŌTI-Ā-ROHE KI TE WHANGANUI-A-TARA [2023] NZACC 112 ACR 298/21 UNDER THE ACCIDENT COMPENSATION ACT 2001 IN THE MATTER OF AN APPEAL UNDER SECTION 149 OF THE ACT BETWEEN NIKKI MOLLET Appellant AND ACCIDENT COMPENSATION CORPORATION Respondent Hearing: 26 May and 10 July 2023 Held at: Hamilton/Kirikiriroa Appearances: K Koloni for the Appellant P McBride for the Respondent Judgment: 11 Jul...
...failure amounts, at a minimum, to unsatisfactory conduct on the part of Karen Clark. [65] Mr Clancy submits for the prosecution that the evidence of Ms Lindsay, that there was no such oral disclosure, should be preferred and points to the following matters: 12 [a] The emails contained in the hearing bundle, which pre-date the first sale and purchase agreement, support Ms Lindsay's account. Particularly, the emails show: [i] Astrid Clark offering to present an offer to...
...industrial land, where even the Council 's expert Mr Foy did not originally hold the view that this would create a more than minor effect. The Council's opposition put Bunnings to costs it would not have otherwise incurred, as all outstanding matters leading to the Commissioners' decision to decline had been agreed upon at mediation. It is submitted5 that the Council's conduct at the hearing further justifies a significant costs award. Reply for the Council [6]...
...a means to sanction parties who fail to properly take part in the statutory mediation and investigation processes. The discretion conferred on the Court by s 182(2), however, must be exercised judicially and consistent with the interests of justice. This involves consideration not only of the blameworthy conduct of the plaintiff but also the overall interests of both the plaintiff and the defendant. [22] I respectfully agree with these observations. The issues [23] The Cour...
2018 Chief Judge’s MB 277 IN THE MᾹORI LAND COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AOTEA DISTRICT A20120015167 CJ 2013/4 UNDER Section 45 of Te Ture Whenua Māori Act 1993 IN THE MATTER OF Paratene Mita Hotene MOHI WIREMU HOTENE Applicant Judgment: 5 September 2018 DECISION OF CHIEF JUDGE W W ISAAC 2018 Chief Judge’s MB 278...
...proceedings. It was certainly not due to any default on the part of the Standards Committees. 7 Prejudice, Particulars, Lack of Time [22] As to prejudice generally, we note in his affidavit and submissions Mr Orlov raises numerous matters of insufficient particularisation, lack of discovery and “incomprehensible” charges. [23] These very matters have also been the subject of clear rulings by the Court of Appeal, for example,5 the Court refers to Mr Orlov’s cont...