Search Results

1. Gilvray v Rungarunga - Succession to Tamati Rungarunga [2023] Chief Judge's MB 551 (2023 CJ 551) [pdf, 319 KB]

   ...the order or certificate of confirmation or make such other order or issue such certificate of confirmation as, in the opinion of the Chief Judge, is necessary in the interests of justice to remedy the mistake or omission. [35] The Court of Appeal has recently confirmed that the power under s 44(1) falls into two parts:5 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 or...

2. [2011] NZEmpC 6 Green v Transpacific Industries Group NZ Ltd [pdf, 107 KB]

   ...injunction for the relatively short balance of the restraint than that the defendant should be required to prove its loss and damages at trial. [37] Ultimately, this Court must take appropriate cognisance of the clear signal given by the Court of Appeal in Fuel Espresso v Hsieh 2 that not only are such provisions to be taken seriously by the parties that have entered into them expressly but that they are amenable to enforcement by injunction to the extent that they are reasonable a...

3. [2013] NZEmpC 188 Hook v Stream Group (NZ) Pty Ltd [pdf, 124 KB]

   ...Commission. 6 [2010] FWA 7358 at [52]. 7 [2012] FWAFB 7097. offensive so as to validate dismissal and that the employer had no social media policy in place. [34] In upholding the decision of the Commissioner (on the limited grounds of appeal available under the Fair Work Act), the full bench made the following apposite comments: 8 The posting of derogatory, offensive and discriminatory statements or comments about managers or other employees on Facebook might...

4. Kemp - Otairi B2B (2010) 8 Taitokerau MB 216 (8 TTK 216) [pdf, 117 KB]

   ...matter. What matters is that the PCA retain the opportunity to acquire Maori freehold land that is either currently owned by Maori or which was formerly owned by Maori. [43] In any event, the High Court’s comment is at odds with the Court of Appeal’s view. In Valuer-General v Mangatu Inc [1997] 3 NZLR 641 at 650 to 651 the Court observed: While no one can be absolutely excluded as a possible purchaser of Māori freehold land, the 1993 Act imposes a significant barrier on alienat...

5. Recording Industry Association of New Zealand v Telecom NZ 2688 [2013] NZCOP 13 [pdf, 329 KB]

   ...holder, not the general public. [51] The rights holder observed the similarity between this provision and s 121(2) dealing with flagrancy and similar considerations in assessing additional damages in other copyright cases. It referred to the Court of Appeal’s decision in Skids21 but the Tribunal does not find that of much assistance. In that case the court was able to consider factors such as the intention of the parties, their means, their conduct – none of which are available to...

6. Pope v Human Rights Commission (Strike-Out Application) [2014] NZHRRT 3 [pdf, 88 KB]

   ...may stay all or part of the proceeding on such conditions as are considered just. (4) This rule does not affect the court’s inherent jurisdiction. [33] In Commissioner of Inland Revenue v Chesterfields Preschools Ltd at [89] the Court of Appeal conveniently explained these different grounds: [89] The grounds of strike out listed in r 15.1(1)(b)–(d) concern the misuse of the court’s processes. Rule 15.1(1)(b), which deals with pleadings that are likely to cause prejudice or...

7. [2018] NZEnvC 015 Mawhinney v Auckland Council [pdf, 21 MB]

   ...Eyres Eco-Park Limited'" ("Eyres Eco-Park']. In that case there were three rules relevant to the claimed existing use: a 1988 rule, a 1995 rule , and a 2000 rule as described by O'Regan J giving the judgment of the Court of Appeal. The applicant at first instance, Eyres, claimed that44: . its existing use right is defined by reference to the use of the land and the effects of that use prior to the introduction of the 1988 rule . The council says that the exist...

8. [2018] NZEnvC 115 Auckland Council v KI Braines [pdf, 403 KB]

   ...Given the position now reached by the parties, the only remaining issue that I see outstanding in respect of Mr Braines' concerns in this light is what level of ongoing tenancy at the main house was envisaged. There was nothing in the abatement appeal order that identifies the issue of the use of the main house. Whether this was commented on in passing or not in 2013 is unclear at this stage. The agreement reached between the parties in 2018 was one simply recorded by the Court,...

9. Chief Executive, Ministry for Culture and Heritage - Tāonga Tūturu found at Plimmerton (2012) 283 Aotea MB 166 (283 AOT 166) [pdf, 202 KB]

   ...Maori Land Court has jurisdiction under subsection (1) or subsection (2) of this section. (4) To avoid doubt, section 30 of Te Ture Whenua Maori Act 1993, and any other relevant provision in that Act, applies to any claim for ownership or any appeal lodged under this Act. [25] In addition to the decision cited earlier concerning a waka Tiwai, this Court has also considered claims to täonga tuturu from the west coast of the lower North Island in Hirini v Thomas.3...

10. Kokiri v Hori - Tahae Kunikuni Pekapeka Roberts and Te Tahi Francis Te Tapua Te Amo Roberts Whanau Trust (2016) 36 Te Waipounamu MB 151 (36 TWP 151) [pdf, 216 KB]

    ...http://www.lexisnexis.com/nz/legal/search/enhRunRemoteLink.do?ersKey=23_T22319040467&backKey=20_T22319040468&homeCsi=274497&A=0.7328021198251591&urlEnc=ISO-8859-1&&dpsi=0069&remotekey1=REFPTID&refpt=1993A4S4:COURT&service=DOC-ID&origdpsi=0069 36 Te Waipounamu MB 162 (b) exercise its powers under section 244; or (c) terminate the trust if the Court is satisfied that there is a sufficient degree of support for termination among the beneficia...