Search Results

1. [2020] NZEmpC 74 New Zealand Post Primary Teachers’ Association Inc v Secretary for Education [pdf, 237 KB]

   ...Court Rules, requiring the pleading to state propositions of law or matters like the burden of proof. 2 See Hoyle v Hoyle [2016] NZHC 3120 at [59]-[60]. This was case was partially overturned on appeal, but not on this point: Hoyle v Hoyle [2017] NZCA 516. 3 Letang v Cooper [1965] 1 QB 232 (CA) at 242-243. [43] There was sufficient information in the pleadings to alert the defendants to the nature of the case to be answer...

2. Amoroa - Omuriwaka Māori Reservation (2017) 163 Waiariki MB 93 (163 WAR 93) [pdf, 242 KB]

   ...injunction or otherwise. As well, the Court has the power, at any time, to add, reduce, replace or remove trustees under ss 239 and 240 of the Act. 8 [26] The paramount duty of trustees is to obey their terms of trust. In Rameka v Hall the Court of Appeal set out the general responsibilities of trustees as follows: 9 [28] The general responsibilities of responsible trustees are set out in s 223 of the Act. That section refers to the following: (a) Carrying out the terms of...

3. LT v SH [2019] NZIACDT 57 (7 August 2019) [pdf, 174 KB]

   ...following provisions of the Code: General 1. A licensed immigration adviser must be honest, professional, diligent and respectful and conduct themselves with due care and in a timely manner. Futile immigration matters 9. If a proposed application, appeal, request or claim is futile, grossly unfounded, or has little or no hope of success, a licensed immigration adviser must: a. advise the client in writing that, in the adviser’s opinion, the immigration matter is futile, grossly...

4. CAC 409 v Brady [2019] NZREADT 21 (23 May 2019) [pdf, 219 KB]

   ...the Authority within 20 working days of the date of this decision. [2019] NZREADT 21 - Ball & Brady - publishing [56] 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 ____________________ Ms N Dangen Member _________...

5. SM v ML LCRO 79 / 2011 (22 November 2012) [pdf, 130 KB]

   ...to be a reference to section 138(1)(f) of the Act which provides that a Standards Committee may determine to take no further action if, in the opinion of the Standards Committee “there is in all the circumstances an adequate remedy or right of appeal, other than the right to petition the House of Representatives or to make a complaint to an Ombudsman, that it would be reasonable for the person aggrieved to exercise.” [31] However, SM’s complaint cannot be determined on these g...

6. [2023] NZIACDT 15 - TC v MacLeod (1 May 2023) [pdf, 136 KB]

   ...residence application for the complainant and his family. It incorporated a business plan (BP). Immigration New Zealand (Immigration NZ) declined the residence visa on 29 September 2016 as it was not satisfied the business was trading profitably. An appeal to the Immigration and Protection Tribunal was declined on 13 July 2017. [8] On 17 January 2019, a second entrepreneur residence application was filed on behalf of the complainant and his family. Immigration NZ sent a letter...

7. Gilbert - Horahora 1A3B (2017) 158 Taitokerau MB 69 (18 TTK 69) [pdf, 839 KB]

   ...addition, the Court must be satisfied that: 5 2 Sione – Te Hapua 24 (2000) 4 Taitokerau Appellate MB 275 (4 APWH 275) at 276; Rudolph v Reti – Otetao B3A2 [2011] Maori Appellate Court MB 143 (2011 APPEAL 143). 3 McCarthy – Utakura No. 9 (2008) 124 Whangarei MB 84 (124 WH 84). 4 Te Ture Whenua Māori Act, s 329(1). 5 Te Ture Whenua Māori Act, s 329(2). 158 Taitokerau MB 81 (a) The owners have had sufficient notice and o...

8. LCRO 252/2016 MY on behalf of BAT Ltd (12 March 2019) [pdf, 250 KB]

   ...new matter and will not be addressed on review. [65] Mr MY may feel aggrieved that each of the matters raised by him has not been specifically discussed or reasons provided for rejecting them. In this regard, reference is made to the Court of Appeal decision R v Nakhla (no 2) where the court said:15 As to the complaints in the motion that the Court did not deal with certain submissions and attributed to counsel a submission he did not make it may be observed that a belief on the pa...

9. Raukawa v Lux - Opape 3A No 1E (2019) 210 Waiāriki MB 114 (210 WAR 114) [pdf, 406 KB]

   ...every trust constituted under this Part of this Act the Court shall appoint 1 or more responsible trustees, and may appoint 1 or more advisory trustees and 1 or more custodian trustees. [10] In the leading case Clarke v Karaitiana the Court of Appeal held:4 [51] The touchstone is s 222(2) itself. In appointing a trustee, the Court is obliged to have regard to the ability, experience and knowledge of the individual concerned. In considering those issues, the Court will no doubt have...

10. AZ v YX LCRO 175 / 2010 (25 March 2011) [pdf, 146 KB]

    ...revised estimate figures”. [83] An estimate is a representation that costs will be in the vicinity of a given sum and all due care must be exercised when providing same. See J and J Abrams Ltd v Ancliffe [1978] 2 NZLR 420. [84] The Court of Appeal has also made some pertinent comments concerning estimates in Kirk v Vallant Hooker & Partners [2002] NZLR 156 at para 49. In that case the Court stated:- 14 “Second, the question of loss or otherwise due to excess over...