Search Results

1. Martin - Lot 2 Deposited Plan South Auckland 26130 (2013) 59 Waikato-Maniapoto MB 154 (59 WMN 154) [pdf, 135 KB]

   ...Martin remembered discussions with a real estate agent mentioning that Mr Colvin had spent money changing the status. She also said that the issue of status was never raised by their solicitor. She said:11 Marie Martin: Well we just took the statement from the land agent at face value and assumed that the lawyer who did the conveyancing would pick anything up, would pick up the fact that it wasn’t. [50] I note that all of that evidence was hearsay. Furthermore Mr Colvin did not...

2. TG v Standards Committee LCRO 205/2014 (30 June 2014) [pdf, 359 KB]

   ...reason. This decision is not binding in any broader sense. In the particular circumstances I consider it is the proper response to the breach of professional standards. [87] The Registry will provide Mr TG’s apology to Judge EJ with Mr TG’s consent. [88] As a consequence of the Standards Committee finding being reversed, the orders made under s 156 fall away, and the review is determined on the basis no further action will be taken on the complaint or matter pursuant to s 15...

3. Tonks v Stone [pdf, 105 KB]

   ...allowances are reasonable therefore I consider that the quotation/estimate is a reasonable assessment of the cost of repairs. 6.8 The quotation/estimate states: “No allowance has been made for the following requirements: o Building consent/application or payment thereof o Testing of timber etc o Landscaping – protection of existing flora. We strongly recommend that all plants be removed and temporarily replanted elsewhere away from the building works o Electrical...

4. Langdon v ACC [2014] NZACA 9 [pdf, 71 KB]

   ...through a series of directions conferences in 2012 and 2013. After Mr Forster was instructed, the issues were refined to cover the question of the correct calculation of Mr Langdon’s relevant earnings in relation to the 1990 accident only, and by consent, matters pertaining to the 1984 accident and related relevant earnings calculation will need to be progressed separately. The Authority does not have jurisdiction in respect of this matter, as no primary decision has been made by ACC....

5. AN v DH LCRO 119/2015 (23 December 2015) [pdf, 97 KB]

   ...saying: As a courtesy I’m advising you that I’m referring the matter of TH’s evidence re para 5 of her affidavit to a criminal specialist with a view to perjury proceedings being commenced against TH. If Ms DH wishes to formally retract her statement on the basis that her evidence about Boxing Day contact was fabricated, then that would be an end of the matter. 2 DH v Kimber [2014] NZFC 1092 at [6]. 5 [20] The Family Court...

6. [2017] NZEmpC 30 Lumsden v Skycity Management Ltd [pdf, 222 KB]

   ...1 See, for example, Employment Relations Act 2000, s 3(a)(v). 2 Emphasis added. [14] As I observed in my earlier judgment upholding Mr Lumsden’s challenge to the Authority’s determination dismissing aspects of the statement of problem on the basis that they were frivolous and vexatious: 3 While it is true that s 149 restricts a party’s ability to revisit a settlement agreement, it may not provide an impermeable barrier. There may be circumstances...

7. LCRO 201/2017 ZK v XM (29 June 2018) [pdf, 288 KB]

   ...mind. [49] The only other reference to ownership of the property produced to this Office, apart from the June 2013 will itself, is Ms XM's handwritten file note of her meeting with Mrs RM at [Rest Home A] on 31 May 2013 which includes the statement “200,000 Value of house estimated 50,000 owed to [Mr SP] * 150,000 equity”. I observe that note appears to confirm the incorrect assumption made by Mrs RM that she had sole ownership of the property. I also note that Mrs RM...

8. Hohepa v Banks - Waima C30A [2019] Māori Appellate Court MB 629 (2019 APPEAL 629) [pdf, 442 KB]

   ...unauthorised house on the block and people enter onto the block to use the house. Trespass has occurred and is occurring. Who has committed trespass? What is the position of the Pihema Whānau Trust? [23] Every person who enters the block without the consent of the owners is trespassing. Those persons currently enter on the purported authority of the Pihema Whānau Trust. The Pihema Whānau Trust also owns the unauthorised house on the block. The Pihema Whānau Trust is tresp...

9. [2019] NZEmpC 83 Pitman v Advanced Personnel Services Ltd [pdf, 374 KB]

   ...competitor. Before resigning he took steps to assist A Temp to gain a springboard advantage in establishing its business. That assistance included gaining access to Advanced Personnel’s intellectual property such as a budget, profit and loss statement, and certain business plans. He engaged a health and safety consultant for A Temp, arranging for a web designer and media advisor, and organised an accounting software package for it. Significantly, he successfully approached sev...

10. [2022] NZACC 88 – Pol v ACC (12 May 2022) [pdf, 284 KB]

    ...decision dated 13 June 2019, prior to another Reviewer issuing her review decision on the second IRP. The Corporation accepted that the 13 June 2019 IRP had been superseded by the other Reviewer’s directions. Therefore, this IRP was quashed by consent, and the Corporation was directed to prepare a new IRP with input from Mr Pol. [26] In May 2020, Mr Pol’s then case manager asked his GP, Dr Andrew Miller, for recommendations on what treatment and rehabilitation Mr Pol required,...