Search Results

1. Carley (INZ) v Navarette-Scholes [2015] NZIACDT 42 (20 April 2015) [pdf, 85 KB]

   ...her client’s immigration applications. [3] Issuing the cheques was potentially the result of a failure on the part of Ms Navarette-Scholes to maintain professional business practices relating to finances. [4] Ms Navarette-Scholes accepts she was responsible for issuing the cheques, but says there were mitigating circumstances, without specifying the details of what they were. [5] The Tribunal has to determine whether the information it has regarding the dishonoured cheques establishe...

2. Recording Industry Association of New Zealand v Telecom NZ 4366 [2013] NZCOP 11 [pdf, 215 KB]

   ...relevant circumstance is the fact that the Applicant itself does not consider a deterrent penalty to be appropriate and has not requested the Tribunal to make such an award. [30] In addition, the Tribunal notes that the Respondent has accepted responsibility for her actions, and has engaged with the Tribunal process. Taking into account all of these factors, the Tribunal agrees that no deterrent sum should be awarded in this case. Orders [31] In summary, therefore, the Tribunal...

3. Hata – Opape 3C3B (2014) 95 Waiariki MB 60 (95 WAR 60) [pdf, 167 KB]

   ...application. The trustees did not organise an AGM. [10] At the next Court hearing held on 7 November 2013, I directed the trustees pursuant to s 238 to meet and provide a definitive answer as to whether they supported the application. 6 [11] A response from the trustees dated 13 November 2013 was not received by the Waiariki Registry until 22 November 2013, and only after the Court directed the Registrar to notify them that if they did not formally respond to the Court’s direct...

4. ACP v ZXP Ltd and ZXO Ltd [2013] NZDT 129 (13 June 2013) [pdf, 74 KB]

   ...August 2002. ACP purchased the property in 2009. [3] It is apparent that significant moisture build-up occurred in the ceiling cavity causing damage. Remedial work has cost in the vicinity of $35,000. ACP’s claim that ZXP Ltd is partly responsible for not leaving a large enough gap in the ceiling to allow moisture to escape and that ZXO Ltd are partially liable for putting in a moisture extraction system that did not work properly. [4] During today’s hearing, the repr...

5. Merito - The Moutoki, Tokata and Rurima Islands (2011) 34 Waiariki MB 176 (34 WAR 176) [pdf, 103 KB]

   ...counsel regarding information, it is said, that had been provided to the trustees of the Rūrima Islands on, inter alia, the MFLRP, I have now had an opportunity to discuss this application with the Registrar and Court staff. The Deputy Registrar responsible for the project confirmed that the owners and their representatives are entitled to notice, to be heard and to pursue the remedies of rehearing, appeal and review. [8] The current application concerns a review of trust that began...

6. ENVC Hearing 27Jul15 AC suppl evidence Sam Shumane [pdf, 135 KB]

   ...design and parking deck at Matiatia Bay, Waiheke. 3. My qualifications and experience are set out in my Statement of Evidence in Chief dated 11 July 2014. 4. The purpose of this supplementary statement is to provide the Court with my response to Supplementary Evidence by Mr David Mitchell, dated 22 June 2015 (DM Evidence) and the draft set of conditions by WML, dated 22 May 2015 (Draft Conditions). I also refer in this statement to the changes to the draft traffic condit...

7. Kahukura v Moore – Manukōrihi 1B Section 2 (2013) 299 Aotea MB 153 (299 AOT 153) [pdf, 111 KB]

   ...utility then of a trust is such circumstances is not clear unless there is the suggestion that someone needs to ensure that any rates are paid and that the house is insured. If Ms Moore remains Mr Ngaia’s caregiver then it may be that those responsibilities should fall to her as an agent for the owners. Alternatively, a trust might be established, whänau or ahu whenua, subject to an occupation order and a s18(1)(a) declaration or similar acknowledgment that Mr Ngaia has a life...

8. CAC 10044 v He [2011] NZREADT 9 [pdf, 90 KB]

   ...knowing he did not have authorisation to do so. Background [3] The defendant is a licensed real estate salesperson who at the material time was employed by Queen Street Realty Limited in Auckland. [4] On 20 December 2010 the defendant filed a response to the charge in which he admitted both of the two charges referred to above. [5] As a consequence of the defendant’s admission to both charges they were adjourned for a hearing by way of formal proof on 3 May 2011. [6]...

9. Deputy Registrar – Lot 1 DP 2811 (2013) 18 Te Waipounamu MB 287 (18 TWP 287) [pdf, 116 KB]

   ...288 Introduction [1] This application was filed by the Deputy Registrar on 28 May 2009 pursuant to s 131 of Te Ture Whenua Māori Act 1993 (“the Act”) to determine the status of Lot 1 DP 2811 (“Lot 1”). The application was filed in response to correspondence received from the estate of the late Mrs Pamela Davis, who was identified as having interests in this block, and to also dispel confusion about the status of Lot 1. [2] The application first came before the Court...

10. Southland Standards Committee v Evans [2011] NZLCDT 38 [pdf, 129 KB]

    ...unable to practice as a lawyer will involve further penalty being suffered by him. [13] However, it has often been pointed out that the primary purpose of the Tribunal’s imposition of penalties is not a punitive one. It is to be a multifaceted response, the primary purpose of which is protection of the public and of the reputation of the profession, as well as preventing a repetition of the behaviour concerned. [14] It is this latter issue, namely the repeated nature of the pra...