Search Results

1. Stebbing – Tauhara Middle 4A 2B 2C (Opepe Farm Trust) (2014) 92 Waiariki MB 218 (92 WAR 218) [pdf, 144 KB]

   ...Judgment: 17 March 2014 ORAL JUDGMENT OF JUDGE L R HARVEY Introduction [1] Two applications have been filed by Gregory Stebbing concerning Opepe Farm Trust. The first is for the appointment of Arapiu (Abe) Seymour as an additional responsible trustee and for the reappointment of the four existing trustees, Temuera Hall, William Aubrey, Charlotte Severne and Hemi Biddle following an election held in November 2013. [2] The second application seeks an increase in trus...

2. LCRO 132/2018 PY v SD (15 February 2019) [pdf, 106 KB]

   ...PY has applied for a review of the determination by [Area] Standards Committee [X] (the Committee) to take no further action in respect of her complaint against Mr SD. The complaint alleged that Mr SD had breached professional standards in his response to an application by Mrs PY for review of a determination by the [Area 2] Standards Committee [X] of an earlier complaint about Mr SD by her. Background/complaint [2] In June 2017, Mrs PY lodged a complaint about Mr SD’s conduct in...

3. OIA-120501.pdf [pdf, 1.1 MB]

   ...On 14 April 2025 the Ministry of Justice (the Ministry), extended the time frame to respond to your request in line with section 15A(1)(b) of the Act, as it was necessary to undertake consultation to make a decision on your request, meaning that a response could not reasonably be made within the original time limit. You were advised that you could expect a response on or by 13 May 2025. s9(2)(a) s9(2)(a) Your request has been referred to me for a response, as it falls within my res...

4. RS v NC LCRO 70/2011 (17 April 2013) [pdf, 85 KB]

   ...to protect the interests of the RS/AS whānau. • Failed to adequately inform the RS/AS whānau. • Did not adequately keep the RS/AS whānau aware of legal costs. • The costs should go to/be paid by Legal Aid. [6] The Practitioner’s response of 25 November 2010 referred to an earlier response (which was not on the Standards Committee file, dated 25 August 2010), but addressed the various elements of the complaint as identified by the Standards Committee. He provided a fu...

5. Rophia v Tipene - Matua Porangahau No2B No 10 (2020) 86 Takitimu MB 84 (86 TKT 84) [pdf, 372 KB]

   ...1983, the land was set aside as a Māori reservation for the purposes of a marae, recreation ground and urupā for the common 1 371 Napier MB 79 (371 NA 79) 86 Tākitimu MB 86 use and benefit of the Ngāti Kere people.2 The current responsible trustees are Eileen Hennessy-Ropiha, Keri Ropiha, Araraina Te Atua-Tipene, Anthony Tipene, Shane Tutaki and Donna Walsh.3 [7] Porangahau 2B11, noted as the Rongomaraeroa Reserve, is a block of Māori freehold land 3.288 hectare...

6. Reekie v Attorney-General (for Department of Corrections) [2022] NZHRRT 20 [pdf, 229 KB]

   ...request. [8] Mr Reekie’s claim is only in relation to the documents sought at 4, 5 and 6 of the information privacy request as matters relating to the video footage have already been resolved. Mr Reekie claims he was not provided with a full response to points 4, 5 and 6 of the information privacy request until after the involvement of the Privacy Commissioner. OTHER MATTERS ARISING FROM 12 MARCH 2012 EVENTS [9] Mr Reekie took a number of actions following the events of 12 March...

7. OIA-124050.pdf [pdf, 5.3 MB]

   ...INFORMATION CATEGORIES SOUGHT 3.1 Without limiting the generality of the above, the request specifically encompasses: (a) All correspondence, including but not limited to: • Emails (including attachments, calendar invitations, and automated responses) • Letters (physical and electronic) • Memoranda • Text messages and instant messaging communications • Social media communications s9(2)(a) s9(2)(a) (b) Meeting records, including: • Meeting minutes and notes •...

8. LCRO 27/2021 BK v RQ (27 August 2021) [pdf, 223 KB]

   ...RQ’s primary obligation was to the executor; obligations she owed to the beneficiaries were extremely limited; and (h) there was no evidence to suggest that Ms RQ had failed to act in a competent and timely manner; and (i) Mr HM had primary responsibility for reporting to the beneficiaries; and (j) request of beneficiaries to sign a deed of interim distribution was not uncommon in circumstances where distribution within six months of probate was being proposed. Application for...

9. [2010] NZEmpC 156 Raukura Hauora o Tainui Trust v Nathan [pdf, 53 KB]

   ...oversee the operation of the four clinics. Ms Blomfield had an office at the Manurewa Clinic behind the reception area which she shared with Ms Nathan who reported to her. [14] In her evidence, Ms Blomfield described Ms Nathan’s role and responsibilities. She explained that it included the training and supervision of the receptionists and being responsible for daily banking arrangements. The witness candidly acknowledged that when she began working for the plaintiff she did no...

10. Sen v Kiff [2012] NZWHT Auckland 3 [pdf, 156 KB]

    ...Ballard’s lack of participation in the process overall and non-attendance at the hearing. The Tribunal is also entitled to determine the claim on the basis of the information before it. [28] The experts’ opinion was that the builder was responsible for defects in the installation of the Harditex, and that the plasterer was at fault because the texture coating was in direct contact with the top of the window head flashings and because of other plastering defects. [29...