Search Results

1. Taueki v Horowhenua Sailing Club Ltd - Horowhenua (11) Lake (2013) 304 Aotea MB 288 (304 AOT 288) [pdf, 129 KB]

   ...assistance from the Maori Land Court by way of funding to enable the Trust obtain legal advice. Your response on this would be much appreciated. We do not feel we can progress this matter without legal advice and the Trust as you know has very limited resources at this time. 4. Short term: To cover the interim period we have agreed as a Trust to confirm the status quo until further notice or until the MoP is signed, provided: (a) LDB takes reasonable steps during this interim...

2. [2015] NZSAAA 01, (30 January 2015) [pdf, 81 KB]

   ...parties share the responsibility for bringing up and supporting any relevant children. (6) Whether the parties share household and other domestic tasks. (7) Whether the parties share costs and other financial responsibilities by the pooling of resources or otherwise. (8) Whether the parties run a common household, even if one or other partner is absent for periods of time. (9) Whether the parties go on holiday together. (10) Whether the parties conduct themselves towards, and are tre...

3. Churton v Trustees of the Mangaporou Trust (2015) 337 Aotea MB 131 (337 AOT 131) [pdf, 219 KB]

   ...such as rentals, that are derived from the retention, use and development and control of the trust lands… Clearly the Churtons have been demanding lessees. … Any further occupation by the Churtons will be demanding of the limited trust resources, relative to any new lessee who will comply with a new lease agreement. That cannot be in the best interests of all the owners, their whānau, hapū or descendants. [32] I agree that the applicant’s future interest must be weighed...

4. [2013] NZEmpC 89 NZ Dairy Workers Union Inc v Fonterra Brands (NZ) Ltd [pdf, 105 KB]

   ...such an outcome being imposed. This, it submitted, would abrogate the rights of the workers under the clause. [12] Two witnesses gave evidence for Fonterra. The first was Helen Blair who was, at the time of the negotiations for the cea, Human Resources Manager Operations. The second was Brian How who was, at the time of the negotiations, Strategic Projects Manager. Both represented the company in the negotiations. They each gave evidence of their specific understanding of th...

5. [2014] NZEmpC 235 Rutherford Street Kindergarten v Chilton [pdf, 119 KB]

   ...30 May 2012 enquiring as to what had happened, finishing with the words “since I have heard nothing further from you in relation to a letter back to the kindergarten that you mention, I am now asking for your confirmation that NZEI will not be resourcing any more time on my case”. She then sought legal advice from her current lawyer on 11 June 2012, who said he would review the matter. He did and, following correspondence between counsel, proceedings were issued on or about 12...

6. [2015] NZEmpC 41 Denyer v Peter Reynolds Mechanical Ltd t/a The Italian Job Service Centre [pdf, 185 KB]

   ...may reflect nothing more than a perverse determination to erect as many barriers as possible in the hope that the employee will eventually give up. Alternatively, it may reflect simple apathy and/or prioritisation of the defendant’s financial resources. 17 Imposition of a low level fine in such a case, on the basis that the amount at issue is similarly low, may not adequately address other important considerations, such as deterrence and denunciation. [20] Mr Hutcheson submi...

7. Horan – Hiwarau C (2013) 70 Waiariki 61 (70 WAR 61) [pdf, 159 KB]

   ...the partition would not affect the residual value of Hiwarau C, apart from the removal value and that the Pukepuke whanau would not get anything more than was originally amalgamated into Hiwarau C. 70 Waiariki MB 66    [16] I note that a resource consent report was also obtained from the Opotiki District Council Environment and Planning Manger. That report recommends consent be given subject to a Māori Land Court partition order being made and other requirements as to subdivi...

8. Matthews v Matthews - Estate of Graham Ngahina Matthews [2016] Māori Appellate Court 212 (2016 APPEAL 212) [pdf, 218 KB]

   ...Matauri X Incorporation (2009) 7 Taitokerau Appellate MB 216 (7 APWH 216). 3 Nicholls v Trustees of W T Nicholls Trust - Part Papaaroha 6B Block [2014] Māori Appellate Court MB 2 (2014 APPEAL 2). 2016 Maori Appellate Court MB 217 and resources the appellant has given to the appeal and their degree of success; (b) the appellants’ total legal costs are $40,767.50 (incl GST) excluding $1,421.50 for disbursements. That total includes 20 hours for briefing and settling aff...

9. AJ v BJ LCRO 258 / 2011 (18 July 2013) [pdf, 121 KB]

   ...having reduced his fee, the Practitioner confirmed that the Respondent had in fact paid the lower fee, adding that although he did not resile from the view that the fee was fair and reasonable, commercial reality dictated that no further time or resources ought to be spent on that matter. [18] A review hearing was held on 23 August 2012, attended by the Practitioner and by the Respondent. I explained to the parties that the review process offered the opportunity for all aspects of...

10. BU v DG LCRO 276 / 2011 (17 September 2013) [pdf, 102 KB]

    ...had been unwilling to negotiate with DN about fees. DG had reached an impasse. BZ had the files, an obligation to meet BU’s fees but no funds, no security and no incentive to increase her exposure in having to meet BU’s fees from her own resources. BU had significant unpaid costs, no file and no instructions. DG had instructions, an incomplete copy of DN’s file, increasing costs and a rapidly approaching hearing. DN owed substantial fees to BU and DG, could add nothing fu...