Search Results

1. BORA Parole Amendment Bill [pdf, 314 KB]

   ...18(1)), they would be justifiable limitations (s 5) in the interest of community safety. 9. The Bill provides for the retention of unattended hearings in very limited circumstances.[24] This does not infringe an offender’s right to natural justice (s 27(1)) as they will have the right to request to attend and make submissions. 10. This advice has been prepared in consultation with Daniel Perkins, Associate Crown Counsel. In accordance with Crown Law protocol, it has also bee...

2. Morgan v Accident Compensation Corporation [2018] NZACA 2 [pdf, 151 KB]

   ...2 O’Neill v Accident Compensation Corporation DC Wellington No. 250/2008, 8 October 2008 at [24] 6 (iv) where an appeal is limited to questions of law, a mixed question of law and fact is a matter of law; (v) a decision-maker’s treatment of facts can amount to an error of law. There will be an error of law where there is no evidence to support the decision, the evidence is inconsistent with the decision or the true and only

3. M (C M Trust) v Tower Insurance Ltd [2019] CEIT-2019-0012 [pdf, 213 KB]

   ...Tribunal Practice Notes to cooperate in advancing these claims to resolution. [4] Section 40 of the CEIT Act empowers the Tribunal to act in an inquisitorial way when determining claims. That wide power is subject to a requirement to observe natural justice. [5] Part of this statutorily established approach to the determination of claims is the need to ensure that claims are progressed expeditiously and cooperatively without unnecessary delay caused by interlocutory applications....

4. [2022] NZACC 111 – Parkinson v ACC (9 June 2022) [pdf, 179 KB]

   IN THE DISTRICT COURT AT WELLINGTON I TE KŌTI-Ā-ROHE KI TE WHANGANUI-A-TARA [2022] NZACC 111 ACR 85/21 UNDER THE ACCIDENT COMPENSATION ACT 2001 IN THE MATTER OF AN APPEAL UNDER SECTION 149 OF THE ACT BETWEEN RICHARD PARKINSON Appellant AND ACCIDENT COMPENSATION CORPORATION Respondent Hearing: 3 June 2022 Held at: Auckland/Tāmaki Makaurau BY AVL Appearances: J Miller for the appellant C Hlavac for the Accident Compensation...

5. UB and DB v ND [2020] NZDT 1391 (29 October 2020) [pdf, 230 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...

6. [2022] NZEmpC 222 Gumbeze v The Chief Executive of Oranga Tamariki [pdf, 225 KB]

   ...claim and Mr Gumbeze’s second affidavit. [9] The application for an extension of time is opposed. Analysis [10] Where an extension of time to file a challenge is sought, the Court must consider whether granting it is in the interests of justice. In that exercise factors that are likely to require consideration include:3 (a) the length of the delay in seeking to challenge the determination; (b) the reasons for the delay; (c) the conduct of the parties, particularly the...

7. UN & JI v NB Ltd [2022] NZDT 32 (23 March 2022) [pdf, 164 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...

8. IN Ltd v NB [2022] NZDT 74 (22 February 2022) [pdf, 101 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. WN v BC & BQ Ltd [2023] NZDT 675 (20 November 2023) [pdf, 227 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 v KH [2023] NZDT 183 (18 April 2023) [pdf, 108 KB]

    ...decision 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...