Search Results

1. Davies v Trustees of Te Tii Waitangi B3 Ahu Whenua Trust - Te Tii Waitangi B3 Trust [2015] Māori Appellate Court MB 611 (2015 APPEAL 611) [pdf, 397 KB]

   2015 Māori Appellate Court 611 IN THE MĀORI APPELLATE COURT OF NEW ZEALAND TAITOKERAU DISTRICT A200140012970 APPEAL 2015/3 UNDER Section 58, Te Ture Whenua Māori Act 1993 IN THE MATTER OF An appeal against an order of the Māori Land Court made on 31 October 2014 at 90 Taitokerau MB 67-106 in respect of Te Tii (Waitangi) B3 Trust and Lot 16 Deposited Plan 61631 and Lot 18 Deposited Plan 61631 BETWEEN MEREAWAROA DAVIES AND RICHARD BOYD TAKIMOANA

2. [2011] NZEmpC 71 Gaut v BP Oil [pdf, 174 KB]

   GAUT V BP OIL NEW ZEALAND LIMITED NZEmpC CHCH [2011] NZEmpC 71 [23 June 2011] IN THE EMPLOYMENT COURT CHRISTCHURCH [2011] NZEmpC 71 CRC 23/10 IN THE MATTER OF a challenge to a determination of the Employment Relations Authority BETWEEN LEON BURGESS GAUT Plaintiff AND BP OIL NEW ZEALAND LIMITED Defendant Hearing: 4 - 6 April 2011 (Heard at Timaru) Appearances: Tim Jackson, advocate for the plaintiff Samantha Turner and Simon Clarke, counsel...

3. [2014] NZEmpC 68 Howell v Zeetags [pdf, 143 KB]

   TODD HOWELL v MSG INVESTMENTS LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS ZEE TAGS LIMITED) NZEmpC AUCKLAND [2014] NZEmpC 68 [12 May 2014] IN THE EMPLOYMENT COURT AUCKLAND REGISTRY [2014] NZEmpC 68 ARC 58/13 UNDER IN THE MATTER OF the Holidays Act 2003 and the Employment Relations Act 2000 proceedings removed AND IN THE MATTER of an action for recovery of wages BETWEEN TODD HOWELL Plaintiff AND MSG INVESTMENTS LIMITED (FORMERLY KN...

4. [2019] NZEmpC 20 Jacks Hardware and Timber Ltd v First Union Inc [pdf, 537 KB]

   ...HARDWARE AND TIMBER LIMITED v FIRST UNION INCORPORATED [2019] NZEmpC 20 [28 February 2019] IN THE EMPLOYMENT COURT OF NEW ZEALAND CHRISTCHURCH I TE KŌTI TAKE MAHI O AOTEAROA ŌTAUTAHI [2019] NZEmpC 20 EMPC 174/2018 IN THE MATTER OF a challenge to a determination of the Employment Relations Authority BETWEEN JACKS HARDWARE AND TIMBER LIMITED Plaintiff AND FIRST UNION INCORPORATED Defendant Hearing: 15 and 16 August...

5. [2017] NZEnvC 209 Auckland Council v London Pacific Family Trust [pdf, 1.1 MB]

   ...narrowed such that no procedural prejudice would arise from our intended course. Secondly, there is also no dispute that there is a sound public interest reason in assisting the Council, parties and the community on these important interpretation matters. Background [4] The AUP is a combined regional policy statement ('RPS'), regional plan and district plan for the Auckland region. It has a hierarchical policy framework with the RPS 'at the top' in the sense th...

6. LCRO 43/2016 XZ v QW [pdf, 209 KB]

   LCRO 43/2016 CONCERNING an application for review pursuant to section 193 of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 AND CONCERNING a determination of the [Area] Standards Committee [X] BETWEEN XZ Applicant AND QW Respondent DECISION The names and identifying details of the parties in this decision have been changed. Introduction [1] Ms XZ has applied for a review of a decision by the [Area] Standards Committee [X] (the Committee) to tak

7. Appendix-4-Additional-submissions.pdf [pdf, 2.8 MB]

   Sunny Kaushal | Chairman Ministerial Advisory Group - Retail Crime Ministry of Justice, Govt of New Zealand Defence of Property and Powers to Detain I am writing in response to your request for input on the proposal "Empowering Security Industry to Deal with Retail Offenders." As a security industry veteran with over four decades of experience spanning law enforcement and private security, I am pleased to offer my insights on this critical matter. Given my unique perspective bridgi...

8. Roborgh v Lay [pdf, 303 KB]

   CLAIM NO: 00062 UNDER The Weathertight Homes Resolution Services Act 2002 IN THE MATTER of an adjudication BETWEEN LYNNE ROBORGH and LEON JOHN ROBORGH Claimants AND No First or Second Respondents AND STEPHEN BRIAN LAY Third Respondent AND JESSOP TOWNSEND LIMITED Fourth Respondent AND AUCKLAND CITY COUNCIL Fifth Respondent AND ARCHITECTURAL WATERPROOFING LIMITED (in Liquidation) Sixth Respondent AND No Seventh Respondent AND TIMOTHY

9. LCRO 136/2021 YL v OB (28 February 2022) [pdf, 249 KB]

   LEGAL COMPLAINTS REVIEW OFFICER ĀPIHA AROTAKE AMUAMU Ā-TURE [2022] NZLCRO 014 Ref: LCRO 136/2021 CONCERNING an application for review pursuant to section 193 of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 AND CONCERNING a determination of the [Area] Standards Committee [X] BETWEEN YL Applicant AND OB Respondent DECISION The names and identifying details of the parties in this decision have been changed. Introduction [1] Ms YL has

10. LCRO 162/2015 and 66/2016 IA v CMR (31 July 2017) [pdf, 253 KB]

    ...although the IRD’s investigations into the company affairs continued. [28] Mr IA refers to information his team unearthed evidencing alleged misdeeds by (H)’s business associates, further instructions from (H), and investigations into those matters which were still underway when Mr IA’s retainer ended. The liquidator mentioned money laundering. Mr IA refers to company claims and losses totalling over $12 million. [29] Mr IA issued invoices for his fees to Mr and Mrs CMR whic...