Search Results

1. OIA-120895.pdf [pdf, 209 KB]

   ...which each of those categories of persons were exempted. Note the request only applies to active/live exemptions as opposed to exemptions that have previously been given and either expired or were revoked prior to the date of this email. In response to your request, I can advise that the following classes of people are exempt under s24(1)(h): • Employees of the Ministry of Justice (the Ministry) (including the Public Defence Service) and other government departments who have b...

2. Constitutional issues & human rights

   ...worth of all people. Find out more about human rights in New Zealand & internationally. The Bill of Rights Act The New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 (BORA) protects and promotes human rights and fundamental freedoms in New Zealand. We're responsible for scrutinising proposed legislation to look at whether it meets BORA requirements. Regulatory Impact Assessments When there's a proposal to create, change or repeal legislation or regulations, the government agency responsible often...

   Located in:

   1. Justice sector & policy

3. OIA-124048.pdf [pdf, 715 KB]

   ...other matters relating to, the Harmful Digital Communications Act 2015. We would fulfil our standard agency obligations to the public, as necessary (e.g., responding to any requests under the Official Information Act 1982). Please note that this response, with your personal details removed, may be published on the Ministry website at: Official Information Act responses | New Zealand Ministry of Justice If you are not satisfied with this response to your request for information, you ha...

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

   ...consider the structure and arrangements Mr Levarko created with the Canadian entities. The Tribunal must consider how what happened to Mr Stanimirovic was connected to Mr Levarko’s arrangements with the Canadian entities. That will determine what responsibility Mr Levarko had. Mr Levarko says what happened to Mr Stanimirovic was completely outside the relationship he had with the Canadian parties, so he had no responsibilities. However, the merits of that can only be understood by...

5. LCRO 35/2024 UX v RT (19 September 2024) [pdf, 265 KB]

   ...responded on each of the three issues. In his 3 This information was not provided with the complaint and was therefore not known to the Committee. 4 This information was also not provided with the complaint and was not known to the Committee. 4 response, he expressly stated that “[n]one of the legal costs are associated with litigation concerning building defects such as ‘leaky building’ problems. [17] The applicant instructed the respondent to confirm the contract. The...

6. LCRO 186/2017 and 84/2018 WE v VF (28 May 2019) [pdf, 190 KB]

   ...gained confidential information from Mr VF about the case; (h) Mr WE declined to withdraw; and (i) copies of legal aid invoices for the Police prosecution were shown to Mr WE, at which time he withdrew from acting in the private prosecution. Response by Mr WE [23] Mr WE briefly responded to the complaint, saying: (a) he was told that he had met with Mr VF on one or two occasions in 2008. He had no recollection of that and no file to corroborate it; (b) when the conflict issue w...

7. [2022] NZEmpC 48 E Tu Inc v Mount Cook Airline Ltd [pdf, 314 KB]

   ...ordinarily consider to be “work” has changed and will change over time. Parliament no doubt enacted the legislation with these points in mind. [26] Idea Services was applied in Law v Board of Trustees of Woodford House.8 In that case employees responsible for school boarding hostels, and who engaged in sleepovers, were held to be working during them. The tasks required during the sleepovers placed significant constraints on their freedom during that time. They performed du...

8. Appendix-5_Jonathan-Williamson_s87F-Report_Hydrogeology-and-Groundwater_28-April-2023.pdf [pdf, 607 KB]

   ...dewatering adjacent to a stream is not considered a significant potential effect because the dewatering discharge is returned to the stream within close proximity to the diversion. 2 Waka Kotahi, 2022a. Ōtaki to north of Levin Highway Project – Response to request for additional information pursuant to section 92 of the Resource Management Act 1991. Letter dated 22 December 2022. Item 64. Section 87F Report – Ōtaki to north of Levin Highway Project (Ō2NL Project) Pr...

9. LCRO 81/2025 CB v AC (26 September 2025) [pdf, 239 KB]

   ...conducted on-line and attended by the parties without counsel. What are the issues in the review? [16] The issues for consideration in this review are: (a) Was the Committee’s inquiry process procedurally unsound? (b) Did the applicant have any responsibility for any protraction of the inquiry? (c) Was the applicant denied opportunity to be heard relating to the former partner’s role in the matter? (d) Was there a reasonable basis for the Committee’s comment quoted in para...

10. Wong-Kam v Barron [2014] NZWHT Auckland 3 [pdf, 76 KB]

    ...made in naming Mr Wong-Kam has not resulted in him incurring any additional or unnecessary expense. [13] Once Mr Wong-Kam was correctly named and joined to the claim the only steps Ms Barron took prior to the mediation was filing a detailed response as directed by the Tribunal. Mr Wong-Kam did not attend the mediation. Ms Barron attended the mediation, together with the other respondents that attended reached a settlement with the claimants. The claimants then elected to pr...