Search Results

1. Donnelly v Tuala Rongohaere Marae (2007) 78 Ruatoria MB 55 (78 RUA 55) [pdf, 267 KB]

   ...settlement process, including fisheries, during the last decade or so, it would appear that marae have assumed a greater prominence in the affairs of iwi and hapū. Surprisingly, these concerns were touched on, if only briefly, by counsel during the appeal hearing and also by the Applicant himself during the lower Court proceedings. However, we are not concerned with such matters. They are irrelevant for our purposes and we have not given them anything other than fleeting considera...

2. Gisborne District Council v Hautapu – Tātarahake No 1 (2013) 27 Tairawhiti MB 295 (27 TRW 295) [pdf, 193 KB]

   ...importance of the matter and, according to the Māori Appellate Court, after having regard to the principles in the Preamble, s 2 and s 17 of the Act.19 18 [2011] Māori Appellate Court MB 284 (2011 Appeal 284) and Cumming - Omaio 8 and Omaio 45 (2009) 12 Waiariki Appellate MB 299 (12 AP 299); and see also Māori Land Court approach in Hunter - Harataunga East 2B2B1 & 2D2 [2004] 106 Hauraki MB 128 (106 H 128), cf Ashby - Oramahoe 1...

3. Rogers v Hauraki – Te Aute A1B (2015) 117 Taitokerau MB 87 (117 TTK 87) [pdf, 222 KB]

   ...provides that every order of the Court affecting title to Māori land binds all persons with an interest in the land. Further, s 77 of the Act is to the effect that an order affecting Māori land is conclusive after 10 years. There has not been any appeal or other challenge to the roadway order since it was made in 1988. I must therefore proceed on the basis that the roadway order is valid. Nevertheless, I do note in relation to the issue of notice to the owners in 1988 that, at...

4. Tait v Kruger - Tauarau Block (2021) 252 Waiariki MB 180 (252 WAR 180) [pdf, 303 KB]

   ...recently summarised in Mikaere v Smallman – Mangatawa No 8A, where the Court stated:14 [16] There are several superior court authorities regarding the principles applicable to the serious step of removal of trustees. They include the Court of Appeal judgments Rameka v Hall and Naera v Fenwick, and the Maori Appellate Court decision of Perenara v Pryor. [17] These authorities support the following general propositions: (a) removal is a serious step and is not undertaken lightl...

5. Taueki - Horowhenua 11 (Lake) Māori Reservation (2005) 163 Aotea MB 99 (163 AOT 99) [pdf, 1.4 MB]

   ...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. Minute Book: 163 AOT 106 The role of the Maori Land Court [19] The Court of Appeal confirmed the broad powers of the Maori Land Court in respect of trusts in the important judgment The Proprietors of Mangakino Township v The Maori Land Court & Anor (CA65/99, 16 June 1999, Wellington). In that decision it was not...

6. Practice Note: Lawyer for the Child - Selection [pdf, 180 KB]

   ...by the procedures set out in the legislation under which the lawyer has been appointed.   6.9   Upon delivery of judgment, the lawyer’s appointment will continue:  (a) for 28 days in order to advise on the merits of an appeal (s 9B(d) FCA) ; and   (b) in COCA cases to comply with  s 55(4).    6.10   Each  Court  will  maintain  a  register  listing  each  appointment  of  a  lawyer,  the  date  of  appointment, ...

7. Martin - Lot 2 Deposited Plan South Auckland 26130 (2013) 59 Waikato-Maniapoto MB 154 (59 WMN 154) [pdf, 135 KB]

   ...to sell. Court: Well how does the status of the land being Māori freehold land affect your plans? Marie Martin: Because it would be... you can’t really sell Māori freehold land. [33] I take into account the comments made by the Court of Appeal in Valuer-General v Mangatu Inc.9 I accept as a general proposition that if land has Māori freehold status it will have a lower market valuation than if it was general land. I also acknowledge that there are restrictions on alienat...

8. [2015] NZEmpC 54 Goel v Director-General for Primary Industries [pdf, 266 KB]

   ...been a reasonable outcome in all the circumstances. nature of the work performed by him, and to be performed if he is to be reinstated, will be relevant. So too will such discretionary considerations as were identified by the Court of Appeal in R v Accused (CA357/94) 15 as including the right to have privacy, dignity and bodily integrity protected from non-consensual medical procedures. The “justice” of allowing a grievance to be determined out of time [51] Decisi...

9. [2023] NZREADT 14 - CAC 2107 v Sheldon (13 June 2023) [pdf, 156 KB]

   ...submissions are to be filed and served by 5 July 2023. Mr Sheldon’s submissions are to be filed and served by 19 July 2023. [74] Pursuant to s 113 of the Act, the Tribunal draws the parties’ attention to s 116, setting out the right of appeal to the High Court. PUBLICATION [75] Having regard to the privacy of the prospective purchaser and the building inspector, as well as the interests of the public in the transparency of the Tribunal, it is appropriate to order publica...

10. Dr Roger Grace - Evidence in Chief [pdf, 667 KB]

    BEFORE THE ENVIRONMENT COURT Auckland Registry ENV 2015 AKL 0000134 IN THE MATTER AND BETWEEN AND of the Resource Management Act 1991 of an appeal under Clause 14 of the First Schedule of the Act TRUSiEES OF MOTITI ROHE MOANA TRUST Appellant BAY OF PLENTY REGIONAL COUNCIL Respondent STATEMENT OF EVIDENCE OF DR ROGER GRACE ON BEHALF OF MOTITI ROHE MOANA TRUST DateQ 25 October 2017 Counsel Acting RB Enright Barrister Level 1, Stanbeth House 28 Customs St...