Search Results

1. Wihapi v Skudder - Pukaingataru B No 3 Sec 2B No 2 [2024] Chief Judge's MB 1156 (2024 CJ 1156) [pdf, 542 KB]

   ...2024 Chief Judge's MB 1168 takes into account the nature and gravity of the matter at issue.”3 This means that the applicant must establish on the balance of probabilities that there was a mistake or omission. [18] The Court of Appeal has confirmed that the power under s 44(1) of the Act falls into two parts:4 The first is an evaluative decision as to whether the order made was “erroneous in fact and law because of any mistake or omission on the part of the court...

2. 20240923-Sentencing-Reform-Amendment-Bill-and-District-Court-Judges-Amendment-Bill [pdf, 5.7 MB]

   ...to be compelled to confess guilt, protected bys 25(d) of the Bill of Rights Act. A defendant may feel increased pressure to plead guilty at the first available opportunity in order to benefit from the maximum available discount. 29. The Court of Appeal in Hessell v R22 issued structured guidance on the maximum sentence reduction available for a guilty plea, largely based upon the time that a plea is entered. This was subsequently overturned by the Supreme Court,23 which held that determ...

3. 20240923-Sentencing-Reform-Amendment-Bill.pdf [pdf, 5.7 MB]

   ...to be compelled to confess guilt, protected bys 25(d) of the Bill of Rights Act. A defendant may feel increased pressure to plead guilty at the first available opportunity in order to benefit from the maximum available discount. 29. The Court of Appeal in Hessell v R22 issued structured guidance on the maximum sentence reduction available for a guilty plea, largely based upon the time that a plea is entered. This was subsequently overturned by the Supreme Court,23 which held that determ...

4. 20241003 Mental Health Bill [pdf, 246 KB]

   ...b. a person may not use force unless they are exercising a specified power in an emergency, there is no reasonable alternative to the use of force, and they use the minimum force that is reasonably necessary in the circumstances. The Court of Appeal in Rosso v R noted that while there is an element of subjectivity in assessing what force is reasonably necessary (for example, there must be an actual belief), the test is objective.12 The purpose of using force will be to enable the...

5. [2024] NZEnvC 238 Coast Road Resilience Group Inc v West Coast Regional Council [pdf, 3.9 MB]

   CRRG v WCRC & GDC – CONSENT ORDER IN THE ENVIRONMENT COURT AT CHRISTCHURCH I TE KŌTI TAIAO O AOTEAROA KI ŌTAUTAHI Decision No. [2024] NZEnvC 238 IN THE MATTER of the Resource Management Act 1991 AND an appeal under s120 of the Act BETWEEN COAST ROAD RESILIENCE GROUP INCORPORATED (ENV-2024-CHC-41) Appellant AND WEST COAST REGIONAL COUNCIL First Respondent AND GREY DISTRICT COUNCIL Second Respondent Environment Judge P A Steven – sitting alone under s279...

6. Wharewera - Succession to Ani Maaka or Annie Maaka [2024] Chief Judge's MB 1299 (2024 CJ 1299) [pdf, 460 KB]

   ...that standard’s inherent flexibility that takes into account the nature and gravity of the matter at issue.9 This means that the applicant must establish on the balance of probabilities that there was a mistake or omission. [17] The Court of Appeal has confirmed that the power under s 44(1) of the Act falls into two parts:10 9 Tau v Nga Whanau O Morven & Glenavy – Waihao 903 Section IX Block [2010] Māori Appellate Court MB 167 (2010 APPEAL 167). 10 Inia v Julian [20...

7. Sutherland - Succession to Henare Arapeti Sutherland [2024] Chief Judge's MB 1311 (2024 CJ 1311) [pdf, 287 KB]

   ...mistake or omission. 3 Ashwell – Rawinia or Lavinia Ashwell (nee Russell) [2009] Chief Judge’s MB 209 (2009 CJ 209) at [15]. 4 Tau v Nga Whānau o Morven and Glenavy – Waihao 903 Section IX Block [2010] Māori Appellate Court MB 167 (2010 APPEAL 167) at [61]. 2024 Chief Judge's MB 1320 [20] The Court of Appeal has confirmed that the power under s 44(1) of the Act falls into two parts:5 The first is an evaluative decision as to whether the order made was “er...

8. Julian v Inia - Succession to Moehuarahi Te Ruuri (2024) 322 Waiariki MB 32 (322 WAR 32) [pdf, 300 KB]

   ...percentage approach. 12 319 Waiāriki MB 200-233 at 206. 13 Submissions of counsel for the applicants, John Kahukiwa, 30 October 2023, at 82; Vincent v Lewis (2006) 25 FRNZ 714, [2006] NZFLR 812 at [81]; This summary was also cited by the Court of Appeal in O’Neill v O’Neill [2021] NZCA 585 at [16]. 322 Waiariki MB 39 [13] Mr Kahukiwa specified factors I need to consider in making orders:14 …the next guiding principle is just the nature of what we’re dealing with in...

9. Hikaiti-Molloy v Hall - Succession to Timi Kaukau [2025] Chief Judge's MB 92 (2025 CJ 92) [pdf, 288 KB]

   ...that standard’s inherent flexibility that takes into account the nature and gravity of the matter at issue.7 This means that the applicant must establish on the balance of probabilities that there was a mistake or omission. [14] The Court of Appeal has confirmed that the power under s 44(1) falls into two parts:8 The first is an evaluative decision as to whether the order made was “erroneous in fact or in law because of any mistake or omission on the part of the court or the...

10. [2024] NZEmpC 238 Preece v Synlait Milk Ltd [pdf, 224 KB]

    ...2022 was relied upon, but this was later amended to 21 March 2022, being four weeks after the letter of termination was sent. 6 See for example Creedy v Commissioner of Police [2006] ERNZ 517 (EmpC) at [28]–[30]. This point was not challenged on appeal. 7 Pike v Nelmac Ltd [2024] NZERA 461 (Member Beck). 8 At [40]–[43]. 9 New Zealand Automobile Assoc Inc v McKay [1996] 2 ERNZ 622 (EmpC). than that alleged.10 It was also suggested that s 34 may be used to consider the...