Search Results

1. Add or Remove a Class Individual Licence or COA [pdf, 226 KB]

   ...under section 65 of the Land Transport Act 1998, or an earlier equivalent provision?  Yes  No Have you ever been ordered by a court to be imprisoned following conviction for an offence and that conviction or order has not been quashed on appeal?  Yes  No In the last 7 years, have you ever been convicted by a New Zealand court of an offence under the Private Security Personnel and Private Investigators Act 2010 or Private Investigators and Security Guards Act 1974 for worki...

2. [2010] NZEmpC 9 Smith v Evolution E-Business Ltd [pdf, 36 KB]

   ...of an inequity” (Gartside v Outram3). This defence has been recognised in New Zealand: European Pacific Banking Corporation v Fourth Estate Publications4 and in European Pacific Banking Corporation v Television New Zealand Ltd 5 the Court of Appeal stated6: What has been called ever since Gartside v Outram the defence of iniquity is an instance, and probably the prime instance, of the principle that the law 2 [1995] 1 ERNZ 1 at...

3. LCRO 10/2016 CT v WN (31 October 2018) [pdf, 255 KB]

   ...WN had concerns as to the credibility of the fresh evidence provided by Mrs CT and suggested to Mrs CT that if she advised the Court that she had been confused as to what was required, then the critical statements could be put before the Court on appeal. Mrs CT refused. Instead, she suggested that it was Mr WN who had failed to put the critical statements before the Court, impliedly asserting Mr WN had been negligent. Mr WN declined. He also declined to continue acting for Mrs C...

4. [2021] - NZREADT 09 - Complaints Assessment Committee 1905 v Papuni (24 February 2021) [pdf, 265 KB]

   ...Papuni is censured, and order that his licence be suspended for a period of 18 months from the date of this decision. [47] Pursuant to s 113 of the Act, the Tribunal draws the parties’ attention to s 116 of the Act, which sets out the right of appeal to the High Court. The procedure to be followed is set out in part 20 of the High Court Rules. _________________ Hon P J Andrews Chairperson _________________ Mr N O’Connor Member ______________...

5. LCRO 39/2022 RD v QL and ZH (29 November 2023) [pdf, 155 KB]

   ...negotiating the terms of the new lease, which have no relevance to this decision. Nature and scope of review [40] The High Court has described a review by this Office in the following way:10 A review by the LCRO is neither a judicial review nor an appeal. Those seeking a review of a Committee determination are entitled to a review based on the LCRO’s own opinion rather than on deference to the view of the Committee. A review by the LCRO is informal, inquisitorial and robust. I...

6. D J Bethell Family Trust - Rangitatau Waitōtara 3C2B2 and 3C2B3 Trust (2019) 408 Aotea MB 210 (408 AOT 210) [pdf, 188 KB]

   ...duties of a trustee satisfactorily; or (b) because of lack of competence or prolonged absence, the trustee is or will be incapable of carrying out those duties satisfactorily. [31] The leading authorities on the removal of trustees are the Court of Appeal judgments Rameka v Hall Naera v Fenwick and Adlam v Savage.5 I adopt the reasoning set out in those decisions. Discussion [32] One of the key problems that has faced this trust has been the ongoing failure by the trustees to f...

7. [2011] NZEmpC 78 NZ Tramways and Public Passenger Transport Employees Union & Ors v Wellington City Transport Ltd [pdf, 93 KB]

   ...intention of the parties in the context of their employment relationship and evidence in relation to past practices under the provisions in question which are long-standing, having been carried over through successive collectives. As the Court of Appeal recently noted, historical considerations such as the way in which the parties have approached particular provisions in past CEAs can be used to assist in their construction. 6 [22] The second question of law posed by the applica...

8. Dennett v Te Tumu Paeroa - Rotohokahoka D North 2A (2017) 178 Waiariki MB 24 (178 WAR 24) [pdf, 283 KB]

   ...Samuels v Matauri X Incorporation – Matauri X Incorporation (2009) 7 Taitokerau Appellate MB 216 (7 APWH 216). These principles were recently endorsed by the Māori Appellate Court in Bratton v Le Lievre [2017] Māori Appellate Court MB 351 (2017 APPEAL 351). 178 Waiariki MB 30 (b) Costs normally follow the event; (c) A successful party should be awarded a reasonable contribution to the costs that were actually and reasonably incurred; (d) The Māori Land Court has a ro...

9. INZ (Calder) v Horan [2019] NZIACDT 23 (23 April 2019) [pdf, 163 KB]

   ...Mr Horan rejects the Tribunal’s previous decision. He repeats his explanation and justification for his conduct given earlier to the Tribunal. He states that he will continue to stand by his actions which, if necessary, will be vindicated on appeal. Mr Horan describes the Code as a ridiculous “Code of Entrapment”. He denies that “we” (immigration advisers) are “the slaves of Africa”. According to him, the Authority and the Tribunal amount to a counterproductive co...

10. Broughton - Horowhenua 11B36 Sec 2L4A Kaiwiu Marae (2020) 424 Aotea MB 20 (424 AOT 20) [pdf, 260 KB]

    ...contract in which that person may be interested or concerned other than as a trustee of another trust. [19] Two important and leading authorities on the law concerning conflicts of interests in Māori land trusts are the decisions of the Court of Appeal Rameka v Hall and Naera v Fenwick.8 Then there is the equally relevant judgment of the Supreme Court Fenwick v Naera.9 In Naera v Fenwick citing the earlier authority of Re Thompson’s Settlement, the Court concluded that any invo...