Search Results

1. Director of Proceedings v Emms [2013] NZHRRT 5 [pdf, 165 KB]

   ...meeting from the Voice Note machine because both the Director and Mr Zindel put questions to witnesses quoting from such notes. The notes themselves were not produced as evidence. In the result the account given by Mr Emms was not challenged by any probative evidence and we approach the case on the footing that clinical notes were taken by Mr Emms on Saturday 7 November 2009, that those notes were made available (in voice form) to the Director on 22 March 2011 and that they were subsequ...

2. White v Potroz - Mohakatino Parininihi No 1c West 3A2 [2016] Māori Appellate Court MB 143 (2016 APPEAL 143) [pdf, 479 KB]

   ...memorandum of transfer was never registered against a land transfer title. [21] On 20 April 1943 Kereni Wetini was killed in action in Tunisia, North Africa. He had executed a will naming his sisters as successors in relation to any land interests. Probate of his will was granted on 18 January 1944. 7 On 17 January 1945 the Court made succession orders vesting Kereni Wetini’s land interests in his sister Mihiata Wetini (Dickson) as to a half interest, with the other half int...

3. Ruapuha and Uekaha Hapu Trust v Tane - Hauturu East 8 Block [2010] 2010 Maori Appellate Court MB 512 (2010 APPEAL 512) [pdf, 226 KB]

   ...suggested three alternative approaches to dealing with succession to Purangi Tanetinorau but ultimately did not express a final view as he concluded that the estate was outside the provisions of Part IV of the 1993 Act by reason of s 100(2) as probate had been granted. Judge Carter concluded that Mr Tane would need to apply to the Registrar for succession orders under ss 81 and 81A of the Māori Affairs Amendment Act 1967 (“1967 Act”). [42] Mr Tane and Ms Tane-Stockler had also...

4. Restorative Justice Victim Satisfaction Survey [pdf, 774 KB]

   ...did not want to answer this question. The ‘other’ category was made up of family member (n=3), already aware of the process (n=3), social worker (n=3), facilitator (n=2), friend (n=1), lawyer, (n=1), magistrate (n=1), boss (n=1), offender (n=1), probation (n=1), Victim Support (n=1) and Work Safe (n=1). Percentages do not always add to 100% due to rounding. Base number = 289. Victims were also asked who else they had contact with about attending the restorative justice meeting. There...

5. [2018] NZEnvC 046 Friends of Nelson Haven Tasman Bay Inc v Tasman District Council [pdf, 1.6 MB]

   BEFORE THE ENVIRONMENT COURT I MUA I TE KOOTI TAIAO 0 AOTEAROA IN THE MATTER AND BETWEEN AND AND AND Decision No. [2018] NZEnvC 0 4- b of the Resource Management Act 1991 of an inquiry under clauses 14(1) and 15(3) of Schedule 1 to the Act FRIENDS OF NELSON HAVEN AND TASMAN BAY INCORPORATED (ENV-2017 -WLG-00001 0) Appellant TASMAN DISTRICT COUNCIL Respondent WAINUI SPAT CATCHING GROUP Applicant JILL/AN RUTH FOXWELL FRIENDS OF GOLDEN BAY SOCIETY (I NCORPORA

6. [2018] NZEnvC 244 Director-General of Conservation v Thames-Coromandel District Council [pdf, 1.2 MB]

   ...existing use rights for all concerned. Where existing use rights are relied on to authorise earthworks inside hygiene zone(s) it will be essential that the evidentiary process is fully engaged, including the provision of necessary information of probative value to the Council. Particular care will be required by landowners and the Council to document accurately 'the character, intensity and scale of the use [at the relevant] date" (s 10(1) and (2) and s 139A(1 )(c)) and for...

7. Director of Proceedings v Smith (Application for Final Non-Publication Orders) [2019] NZHRRT 32 [pdf, 695 KB]

   ...“punishment” or liability but to make a decision on Mrs Smith’s application for permanent name suppression. That decision cannot be surrendered to Ms Lawn and we did not understand the Director to contend otherwise. [65] Given these factors the probative value of the evidence is not outweighed by the risk the evidence will have an unfairly prejudicial effect on the proceeding or needlessly prolong the proceeding (Evidence Act 2006, ss 7 and 8). Alternatively, expressed in terms o...

8. Director of Proceedings v Brooks (Application for Final Non-Publication Orders) [2019] NZHRRT 33 [pdf, 1.6 MB]

   ..."punishment" or liability but to make a decision on Dr Brooks' application for permanent name suppression. That decision cannot be surrendered to Ms Lawn and we did not understand the Director to contend otherwise. [55] Given these factors the probative value of the evidence is not outweighed by the risk the evidence will have an unfairly prejudicial effect on the proceeding or needlessly prolong the proceeding (Evidence Act 2006, ss 7 and 8). Alternatively, expressed in te...

9. YAL final evaluation report July 2021-21 July version [pdf, 569 KB]

   ...present at each court session to provide the young adults with wraparound support. The team is specially trained to work with young adults, and support services include Māori, Pacific and Ethnic Services, Bail Support Officers, Adolescent Specialist Probation Officers, Police Prosecutors and Adolescent Mental Health Nurses as well as existing agencies at the Porirua Court. Everyone at the court is alert to the special needs and characteristics of the young adults. The initiative recog...

10. [2023] NZEnvC 048 Evans v Marlborough District Council [pdf, 944 KB]

    EVANS v MDC – DECISION IN THE ENVIRONMENT COURT AT CHRISTCHURCH I TE KŌTI TAIAO O AOTEAROA KI ŌTAUTAHI Decision No. [2023] NZEnvC 48 IN THE MATTER of the Biosecurity Act 1993 AND of an application under s76 of the Act BETWEEN GEOFFREY IAN TUDOR EVANS (ENV-2020-CHC-105) Applicant AND MARLBOROUGH DISTRICT COUNCIL Respondent Court: Environment Judge P A Steven Environment Commissioner S Myers Hearing: in Blenheim on 27 September 2022 Appearances: Q A M Davies and