Search Results

1. Trustees of the Maungatautari 4G Section IV Trust v Maungatautari Ecological Island Trust - Maungatautari No 4G Sec IV [2015] Māori Appellate Court MB 634 (2015 APPEAL 634) [pdf, 314 KB]

   ...would be filed in the Court below, with additional relevant evidence. He says the appellants have not acted unreasonably and the Court must take into account the historical context of the matter. The pest proof fence was put up without the express consent of the landowners, the first respondents desecrated a wāhi tapu site, and access to the block has been obstructed by MEIT and WDC in the past. Further, counsel argued that MEIT and WDC continue to flout the resource consent condi...

2. Mitchell v Trustees of Pukeroa Oruwhata Trust - Pukeroa Oruawhata Trust (2003) 277 Rotorua MB 285 (277 ROT 285) [pdf, 1.2 MB]

   ...that a special general meeting of the beneficial owners had been set down for 15 March 2003. That meeting would consider several matters including the application to vary the trust order. Sensibly, it was agreed that both applications be adjourned by consent until after that hui. The special general meeting was held and consistent with the decision of the annual general hui of September 2002, the Variation Application was supported by resolution. Minute Book: 277 ROT 287 The first h...

3. Complaints Assessment Comittee 404 v Hawkins [2017] NZREADT 16 [pdf, 214 KB]

   ...limitation on liability. However, he considered that he had bound himself to the contract, as he had finance in place. [14] A written agreement for sale and purchase between Peetom and FFT was not signed until 25 June 2013. A “Form 2” “Client consent for licensee to acquire interest in property”,4 pursuant to which the trustees of Peetom consented to Mr Hawkins (as interested party of FFT) acquiring an interest in the property, was annexed to the agreement. The agreement...

4. IPT 2019-20 Annual Report [pdf, 477 KB]

   ...nature of the determinations made by the Tribunal in the period to which the report relates. This is the eighth full annual report of the Tribunal and covers the 12 months from 1 July 2019 to 30 June 2020. This report contains no financial statements because the Chair does not determine the Tribunal’s budget. 3 Highlights of the 2019/2020 Court Year 1. By the end of the court year, the Tribunal had reduced the number of disposable appeals on hand by...

5. LCRO 88/2022 GX v EJ (2 April 2024) [pdf, 236 KB]

   ...and process of a Committee’s determination. [71] This review has been conducted in accordance with those comments. Process [72] This review has been completed on the material to hand, which includes the Standards Committee file, with the consent of both parties. Review [73] In her complaint Ms GX traversed many matters about which she was dissatisfied with the service and advice provided by Mr EJ. She collated these into four general complaints: (i) Failing to be independen...

6. LCRO 118/2023 TC v GS (13 December 2023) [pdf, 213 KB]

   ...retainer assuming the applicant had not decided to restructure his affairs (and assuming no appeal was lodged). (d) Did the respondent fail to comply with instructions? [84] I have expressed this as a possible issue because of the applicant’s statement that he expected the respondent to achieve settlement immediately following the grant of Court approval. To the extent this constituted an instruction, I am satisfied that it was not an instruction that could reasonably be complied wit...

7. Cribb - Succession to Tieme Karepe, Te One Karepe, Hoani Karepe and Porokuru Te Kiwi [2025] Chief Judge's MB 373 (2025 CJ 373) [pdf, 366 KB]

   ...1/36 Identification of evidence that may be of assistance in remedying the mistake or omission 15. The applicant has provided the following documents in support of this section 45 application: (a) Email document setting out critical statements of the applicant and the Karepe/Cribb whānau land blocks for succession. Received 28 March 2024. (b) Additional research document on descendants of Te One John Hoani Karepe. Received 8 June 2020. (c) Research document undert...

8. Hawkes Bay Standards Committee v Heaphy [2014] NZLCDT 61 [pdf, 343 KB]

   ...at or around the time of this meeting, a direct threat to him to bankrupt him and his family trusts, framed in very strong language. [15] It is completely understandable that both Mr Porter and Mr Heaphy would have been very alarmed by these statements. [16] The second area of risk foreseen by Mr Heaphy, during this post-raid period, was that relating to unpaid taxes of various sorts. [17] Mr Heaphy became aware that there would be allegations of huge cash payments having move...

9. Peni v Pahi — Tiroa E Block and Te Hape B Block (2010) 1 Waikato Maniapoto MB 25 (1 WMN 25) [pdf, 148 KB]

   ...Identifier SA 258/206 shows a transfer to the then trustees of Tiroa E and Te Hape B on 26 January 2005. There was a transfer to the Scott Family Trust on 3 January 2007. A caveat by Mr Stanley was registered on 16 March 2007. On 27 May 2008 a consent notice pursuant to s 221 of the Resource Management Act 1991 was registered on the withdrawal of Mr Stanley’s caveat. Simultaneously titles were issued for Lot 1 DP 396746 and Lot 2-3 DP 396746. The transfer of Lot 1 to Mr Stanl...

10. 03.-Evidence-of-Mr-Dean-Wilson-Muaupoko-Tribal-Authority.PDF [PDF, 402 KB]

    ...MTA on the Manawatū River Accord along with Dianne Rump and Jonathan Procter. 5. I am authorised to give this evidence on behalf of LHT and MTA in relation to the application of Waka Kotahi New Zealand Transport Agency (Waka Kotahi) for resource consents and notices of requirement for designations (NoRs) in respect of the Ōtaki to north of Levin highway Project (Ō2NL Project or Project). 6. As a Project Partner, MTA has worked closely with Waka Kotahi on the Project's developmen...