Search Results

1. Te Ohu Kaimoana Trustee Limited v Te Rūnanga nui o te Aupōuri - application under s 182(4) Māori Fisheries Act 2004 (2015) 102 Taitokerau MB 1 (102 TTK 1) [pdf, 314 KB]

   102 Taitokerau MB 1 IN THE MĀORI LAND COURT OF NEW ZEALAND TAITOKERAU DISTRICT A20130008950 UNDER Section 26C, Te Ture Whenua Māori Act 1993 IN THE MATTER OF An application by Te Ohu Kaimoana Trustee Limited for reference of Māori fisheries dispute between Te Rūnanga Nui o Te Aupōuri and Ngāti Kuri, Ngāi Takoto and Te Rarawa - referred under s 182(4), Māori Fisheries Act 2004 BETWEEN TE OHU KAIMOANA TRUSTEE LIMITED Applicant AND...

2. Ngāti Pāoa Whānau Trust v Hauraki Māori Trust Board (1995) 96A Hauraki MB 155 (96A H 155) [pdf, 1.2 MB]

   ...most appropriate representatives of any class or group of Maori affected by thoseproceedings; and (b) At the request of the ChiefExecutive or the ChiefJUdge. determine, in relation to any negotiations. consultations, allocation of funding. or other matter, the persons who, for the purposes of the negotiations, consultations. allocation, or other matter. are the most appropriate representatives of any class or group of Maori affected by the negotiations. consultations, allocation. or othermatte...

3. [2022] NZEmpC 192 E Tū Inc v Rasier Operations BV [pdf, 483 KB]

   ...person under a contract of service, the court or the Authority (as the case may be) must determine the real nature of the relationship between them. (3) For the purposes of subsection (2), the court or the Authority— (a) must consider all relevant matters, including any matters that indicate the intention of the persons; and (b) is not to treat as a determining matter any statement by the persons that describes the nature of their relationship. (4) Subsections (2) and (3) do not l...

4. [2024] NZEmpC 125 Cronin-Lampe v Minister of Education [pdf, 607 KB]

   ...circumstances existed for time limitation purposes. In addition, MHS’s affirmative defence in respect of the ACC statutory bar led to an important judgment in the Supreme Court,22 and required consideration in this Court’s second judgment.23 These matters were not straightforward. (d) The case was far larger than the vast majority of cases heard by the Employment Court. Significant attendances by several lawyers were required to: (i) assist 19 witnesses with the preparati...

5. [2012] NZEmpC 86 Lend Lease Infrastructure Services (NZ) Ltd v Recreational Services Ltd [pdf, 147 KB]

   LEND LEASE INFRASTRUCTURE SERVICES (NZ) LIMITED V RECREATIONAL SERVICES LIMITED NZEmpC AK [2012] NZEmpC 86 [1 June 2012] IN THE EMPLOYMENT COURT AUCKLAND [2012] NZEmpC 86 ARC 31/12 IN THE MATTER OF proceedings removed from the Employment Relations Authority BETWEEN LEND LEASE INFRASTRUCTURE SERVICES (NZ) LIMITED Plaintiff AND RECREATIONAL SERVICES LIMITED Defendant Hearing: 23 May 2012 (Heard at Auckland) Counsel: Anthony Drake and Rosem...

6. Stanimirovic v Levarko [2018] NZIACDT 3 (7 February 2018) [pdf, 350 KB]

   ...contacted him and identified that Mr Levarko’s licence was being used by the Canadian entities, Mr Levarko says he was helpful. However, Mr Stanimirovic was not a client and Mr Levarko properly discharged his duties to Mr Stanimirovic by discussing matters with him and suggesting that the entities in Canada should deal with his concerns. [7] The complaint focuses solely on the circumstances relating to Mr Stanimirovic. However, it is necessary to consider the structure and arran...

7. CAC 414 & 416 v Tafilipepe [2019 ] NZREADT 13 (10 May 2019) [pdf, 332 KB]

   ...had seen an email from Ms Tafilipepe to [ ] attaching a Scope of Works for the property, with the message “another one to look at”. [36] Mr Simpson further submitted that, at the least, the Tribunal could infer that Ms Tafilipepe discussed matters relating to the Scope of Works with [ ], and that this was the catalyst for having him attend at the property. He referred to Ms Tafilipepe’s and [ ]’s evidence that the reason for his going to the property was to assess the co...

8. LS v MIS [2021] CEIT-2020-0024 [pdf, 387 KB]

   ...NZCEIT 37. 25 R v Graham HC Wellington CRI-2010-085-2538, 8 July 2011. five years ago. My experience of the insurance industry leads me to note that staff such as Q may make a number of phone calls regarding policy renewals and other similar matters on any given day. By all appearances the discussion in question was unremarkable. Therefore, it is questionable whether Q would have any useful recollections. I note, as discussed below, that LS had no specific recollection of th...

9. BORA - Abortion Legislation Bill: Crown Law's advice [pdf, 220 KB]

   ...Crown Law’s view as to the consistency of the draft Abortion Legislation Bill with rights affirmed by the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990. The Bill was considered by the Cabinet Legislation Committee on 23 July 2019. This advice addresses all matters in the Bill with the exception of those provisions that limit access to abortion after 20 weeks’ gestation. In respect of the matters addressed, we conclude the Bill is consistent with the Bill of Rights Act. Summary of advice...

10. Aitcheson v Accident Compensation Corporation (Social Rehabilitation, Attendant care, Laundry Services) [2023] NZACC 143 [pdf, 389 KB]

    IN THE DISTRICT COURT AT WELLINGTON I TE KŌTI-Ā-ROHE KI TE WHANGANUI-A-TARA [2023] NZACC 143 ACR 392/14 ACR 393/14 UNDER THE ACCIDENT COMPENSATION ACT 2001 IN THE MATTER OF AN APPEAL UNDER SECTION 149 OF THE ACCIDENT COMPENSATION ACT BETWEEN JULIE AITCHESON as administrator of the Estate of IVAN MARTINAC Appellant AND ACCIDENT COMPENSATION CORPORATION Respondent Hearing: 18 July 2023 Heard at: Dunedin/Otepoti Appearances: Ms B...