Search Results

1. Edwards - Succession to Ngarangi Kanoa Babbington [2021] Chief Judge's MB 755 (2021 CJ 755) [pdf, 535 KB]

   ...issue.7 This means that the applicant must establish on the balance of probabilities that there was a mistake or omission. 7 Tau v Nga Whanau O Morven & Glenavy – Waihao 903 Section IX Block [2010] Māori Appellate Court MB 167 (2010 APPEAL 167). 2021 Chief Judge’s MB 772 [15] The Court of Appeal has recently 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...

2. Te Amo v Nicholas - Te Whaiti Nui A Toi Block (2020) 233 Waiariki MB 92 (233 WAR 93) [pdf, 387 KB]

   ...couple would have put their money and efforts into obtaining a first home elsewhere without cloudy title. It is a clear enough case of improvement through encouragement and in the expectation of interest… The Court also referred to the Court of Appeal decision in Lankow v Rose, which identified the following four features, which if established would show it would be unconscionable to deny the claimant an interest:16 (a) Contributions, direct or indirect, to the property in ques...

3. Director of Proceedings v Smith (Costs) [2020] NZHRRT 35 [pdf, 259 KB]

   ...approach was challenged in Commissioner of Police v Andrews [2015] NZHC 745, [2015] 3 NZLR 515 (Andrews). In that case the Tribunal had declined an application by the Commissioner of Police for an award of costs against the unsuccessful Mr Andrews. On appeal by the Commissioner the High Court held: [9.1] It is open to the Tribunal to develop new guiding principles for the award of costs, principles which better reflect the jurisdiction in which the Tribunal operates. See [60]. [9.2]...

4. [2021] NZREADT 18 - Brady (28 April 2021) [pdf, 338 KB]

   ...request, we are not persuaded that a finding of a breach of r 6.3 is justified. Should Mr Brady be found guilty of misconduct under s 73 of the Act? [73] In Complaints Assessment Committee 20003 v Zhagroo, her Honour Justice Thomas considered an appeal by a Complaints Assessment Committee against a finding by the Tribunal of unsatisfactory conduct against Mr Zhagroo. The Committee contended that the Tribunal should have made a finding of misconduct.14 As to the determination wh...

5. Adlam v Reihana - Himatangi 1H1A (2022) 447 Aotea MB 1 (447 AOT 1) [pdf, 658 KB]

   ...jurisdiction the Court must be mindful of the interests of other owners in the land and has power to take into account those interests by limiting the term of the order;21 20 Rudolph v Reti – Otetao B3A2 [2011] Māori Appellate Court MB 143 (2011 APPEAL 143) at [37]. See also Sione – Te Hapua 24 (2000) 4 Taitokerau Appellate MB 275 (4 APWH 275). 21 Rudolph v Reti, above n 13, at [38]. See also Bidois – Te Puna 154D3B2B (2008) 12 Waiariki Appellate MB 102 (12 AP 102)....

6. [2015] NZEmpC 76 Sealord Group Ltd v Pickering [pdf, 192 KB]

   ...Mr Pickering for the income lost over that three-month (or 13-week) period. [66] Under s 128(3) of the Act the Court also has a discretion to order an employer to pay a greater sum as compensation for lost remuneration but, as the Court of Appeal made clear in Sam's Fukuyama Food Services Limited v Zhang moderation is required in fixing awards for lost remuneration and any such award must have regard to the individual circumstances of the particular case. 4 [67] In Zhang t...

7. LCRO 2/2018 MC v TL (17 June 2020) [pdf, 304 KB]

   ...scope of review [41] The nature and scope of a review have been discussed by the High Court, which said of the process of review under the Act:13 … the power of review conferred upon Review Officers is not appropriately equated with a general appeal. The obligations and powers of the Review Officer as described in the Act create a very particular statutory process. The Review Officer has broad powers to conduct his or her own investigations including the power to exercise for th...

8. Rolleston v Moore - Lot 1 Deposited Plan South Auckland 52401 and Ongaonga No 1C No 1 Block (2016) 133 Waikato Maniapoto MB 39 (133 WMN 39) [pdf, 297 KB]

   ...lack of substance, the unsuccessful party’s lack of realism, the party’s legal situation, the degree of 8 Nicholls v Nicholls – Part Papaaroha 6B Block [2011] Maori Appellate Court MB 64 (2011 APPEAL 64). 9 Riddiford v Te Whaiti (2001) 13 Takitimu Appellate MB 184 (13 ACTK 184). 10 Manuirirangi v Paraninihi ki Waitotara Incorporation (2002) 15 Whanganui Appellate MB 64 (15 WGAP 64). 11 De Loree v Mokomoko – Hiwarau C (200...

9. IJ v KL LCRO 190/2016 [pdf, 219 KB]

   ...process of review under the Act:31 29 At [49]. 30 Email KL to LCRO (21 September 2016). 13 … the power of review conferred upon Review Officers is not appropriately equated with a general appeal. The obligations and powers of the Review Officer as described in the Act create a very particular statutory process. The Review Officer has broad powers to conduct his or her own investigations including the power to exercise for tha...

10. L v EQC [2021] CEIT-2019-0036 [pdf, 411 KB]

    ...there was fraud, however, the evidence needs to be strong. For instance, if the evidence is circumstantial, any inferences must strongly point towards there being a single likely explanation for the events.5 [28] In Taylor v Asteron, the Court of Appeal considered the remedies available if fraud is found. The Court considered fraudulent claims cases and found that:6 (a) the rule against fraud is a term requiring honesty in connection with claims, implied by law into insurance contr...