Search Results

1. Motiti Rohe Moana Trust and Royal Forest Bird Protection Society Inc. Submissions - 27 November 2017 [pdf, 295 KB]

   ...and unopposed by any other iwi or hapu. Council and the Crown have no evidence to support their argument that Treaty settlements or customary interests are threatened by the proposed rules framework. It is a hypothetical objection. Overlapping claims under the Takutai Moana Act, unless and until resolved by the Crown or High Court, have no impact on jurisdiction under the RMA. Otherwise Council's rules framework in the CMA would be at risk from the same claims. 9 This appeal...

2. LCRO 81/2018 QQ v RR (26 November 2019) [pdf, 548 KB]

   LCRO 81/2018 CONCERNING an application for review pursuant to section 193 of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 AND CONCERNING a determination of the [Area] Standards Committee BETWEEN QQ Applicant AND RR Respondent DECISION The names and identifying details of the parties in this decision have been changed. Introduction Mr QQ has applied for a review of a decision by the [Area] Standards Committee [X] which concluded there had b

3. SAR-Prisoner-voting-and-the-voting-rights-of-detained-people.pdf [pdf, 776 KB]

   ...Independent Electoral Review Panel at [198] 22 At [272] 9vcxud9cj0 2025-06-18 08:28:45 12 2010 Act, was inconsistent with the purpose of the corrections system and constituted a serious breach of the Treaty of Waitangi. 35. There were nine claimants in the inquiry. One of the claimants took the claim on behalf of Māori prisoners and Māori generally. The claimants argued that: 35.1. the right to register as an elector, to exercise a vote, and to exercise the Māori elect...

4. E86 Luke Faithfull - Planning - EIC - Mana Whenua in opp [pdf, 1.1 MB]

   ...representatives of mana whenua in opposition and the following with a focus on planning and statutory matters as they relate to mana whenua matters: 2.6.1. The Project Application and supporting technical information; 2.6.2. The Joint Witness Statements of the various technical experts; 2.6.3. The Applicant’s evidence briefs; and 2.6.4. The updated Proposed Conditions of Consent dated 7 August 2018. 3. PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF EVIDENCE 3.1. In my evidence I will: 3.1.1. Pr...

5. [2007] NZEmpC AC 50A/07 Service and Food Workers Union Inc & Anor v Spotless Services (NZ) Ltd [pdf, 86 KB]

   ...these countervailing imperatives meant that the strikes and lockouts threatened in the notices did not eventuate. [17] Eventually, however and not unnaturally, attitudes hardened. Having started out in presenting a united employer front to union claims, Spotless eventually found itself as the only employer that had either not settled or was otherwise apparently resistant implacably to the union’s claims. First, the district health board employers reached an accommodation with th...

6. RF v CN LCRO 254/2012 (3 November 2016) [pdf, 109 KB]

   ...acknowledge that there has been considerable delay in this review being progressed to resolution. I apologise to the parties for that regrettable delay. Background [3] Mr RF engaged Ms CN to act for him in 2010 in relation to a District Court civil claim he wished to file concerning an agreement for sale and purchase relating to a leaky home. Ms CN is a sole practitioner practising as Law Firm 1. 2 [4] On receiving instructions Ms CN sent Mr RF a copy of Law Firm 1’s stan...

7. [2018] NZSAAA 2 (31 July 2018) [pdf, 422 KB]

   ...so defective that it amounted to a “breach of an essential condition” of his enrolment contract that was so “fundamental and egregious that he was compelled to withdraw”. First, the settlement reached by the parties is not proof that his claims were justified and may well have occurred, as such settlements generally do, for reasons unrelated to the merits of his claim. Secondly, the Provider’s failures were not, in any event sufficient to render withdrawal the only reasonable o...

8. GN v HJ LCRO 30/2015 (22 June 2016) [pdf, 69 KB]

   ...arranged for a friend to contact Mr HJ, enquiring whether it might be possible for her to register a caveat to protect her interest in the property, pursuant to the Property (Relationships) Act (PRA). Ms GN also began gathering evidence to support a claim under the PRA at about that time. [5] Mr HJ’s office received what appears to have been a settlement proposal from Ms GN’s partner, which she was not satisfied with. [6] On 9 June 2013, the telephone records Ms GN has provided ind...

9. [2017] NZEmpC 52 Unite Union Inc v Restaurant Brands Ltd [pdf, 303 KB]

   ...responsible for running a shift (as above), the employee remains in this position for the duration of the rostered period and is paid accordingly, regardless of other management on site. Examples of eligible Shift Supervisors, who have entitlement to claim the Sole Charge Allowance, are as follows:  Rostered as Shift Supervisor, i.e. responsible for running a shift (as above);  Rostered as a Team Member, however, upon commencing a shift is asked to run the shift (as above)...

10. Shaw - Tauwhao Te Ngare (2005) 81 Tauranga MB 8 (81 T 8) [pdf, 3.7 MB]

    ...reasonable access to the Shaw property. i) The Court does not have a discretion under s.18( 1) of the 1993 Act to take into account the various matters raised by Shaw. Minute Book: 81 T 17 j) The application is defective because Shaw does not claim an interest in the Tauwhao foreshore reserve and the Rangiwaea marae reserve. " Lack of Jurisdiction to Make 1976 Order In relation to ground a) the Respondent argued that the meeting of owners in May 1973 was called to discuss...