14049 items matching your search terms
Appeal stream 2010 Transitional Appeals* 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 New Business 291 330 603 518 594 Disposals 216 381 522 792 On Hand 405 627 623 425 New Business 83 196 537 512 442 Disposals 146 366 394 499 On Hand 133 304 422 366 New B...
Noakes & Fruhling Trust v WDC – Costs IN THE ENVIRONMENT COURT AT AUCKLAND I TE KŌTI TAIAO O AOTEAROA KI TĀMAKI MAKAURAU Decision [2023] NZEnvC 184 IN THE MATTER OF an appeal under clause 14 of Schedule 1 of the Resource Management Act 1991 BETWEEN A NOAKES and FRUHLING TRUST (ENV-2022-AKL-078) Appellants AND WAIKATO DISTRICT COUNCIL Respondent Court: Chief Environment Judge D A Kirkpatrick Hearing: On the papers Last case event: Submissions in reply, 11 Augu...
IN THE DISTRICT COURT AT WELLINGTON I TE KŌTI-Ā-ROHE KI TE WHANGANUI-A-TARA [2022] NZACC 103 ACR 297/19 UNDER THE ACCIDENT COMPENSATION ACT 2001 IN THE MATTER OF AN APPEAL UNDER SECTION 149 OF THE ACT BETWEEN NIGEL RENTON Appellant AND THE ACCIDENT COMPENSATION CORPORATION Respondent Hearing: On the papers Submissions: A Beck for the Appellant I Hunt for the Respondent Judgment: 31 May 2022 DECISION OF JUDGE P R S...
...Introduction [1] Mr Halse has filed an application for stay of the balance of this proceeding, due “to a miscarriage of justice occurring should the proceedings continue prior to mistake in law issues being resolved in the Court of Appeal”. [2] This is a reference to judicial review proceedings filed by Mr Halse in the Court of Appeal on 15 May 2023. [3] Te Whatu Ora Health New Zealand (Te Whatu Ora) opposes the application, asserting that it would suffer prejudice...
BEFORE THE REAL ESTATE AGENTS DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL [2023] NZREADT 27 Reference No: READT 049/2019 IN THE MATTER OF Appeals under s 111 of the Real Estate Agents Act 2008 BETWEEN VISHAL and MONISHA SHARMA Appellants AND THE REAL ESTATE AGENTS AUTHORITY (CAC 1901) First Respondent AND JULIE ANNE BRAKE and SUCCESS REALTY LTD t/a BAYLEYS ROTORUA Second Respondents Tribunal: D J Plunkett (Chair) C A Sandelin (Deputy Chairperson) G J...
Rosemarke Investments Limited v Auckland Council IN THE ENVIRONMENT COURT AT AUCKLAND I TE KŌTI TAIAO O AOTEAROA KI TAMAKI MAKAURAU Decision [2024] NZEnvC 205 IN THE MATTER OF an appeal under s 358 of the Resource Management Act 1991 BETWEEN ROSEMARKE INVESTMENTS LTD (ENV-2024-AKL-000002) Appellant AND AUCKLAND COUNCIL Respondent Court: Environment Judge MJL Dickey Hearing: On the papers Last case event: 5 May 2024 Submissions: KRM Littlejohn and S Hiew...
SNOWDON V RADIO NEW ZEALAND COA CA149/2013 [16 April 2013] IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND CA149/2013 [2013] NZCA 108 BETWEEN LYNNE FRANCES SNOWDON Applicant AND RADIO NEW ZEALAND Respondent Hearing: 8 April 2013 Court: O'Regan P, Wild and White JJ Counsel: C R Carruthers QC for Applicant M F Quigg for Respondent Judgment: 16 April 2013 at 11.30 am JUDGMENT OF THE COURT A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed....
IN THE DISTRICT COURT AT WELLINGTON I TE KŌTI-Ā-ROHE KI TE WHANGANUI-A-TARA [2024] NZACC 108 ACAR 179/23 UNDER THE ACCIDENT COMPENSATION ACT 2001 IN THE MATTER OF AN APPEAL UNDER SECTION 149 OF THE ACT BETWEEN KELLIE LEHMANN for the ESTATE of CAROLE DEIDRE YOUNG Appellant AND ACCIDENT COMPENSATION CORPORATION Respondent Hearing: 25 June 2024 Held at: Wellington/Te Whanganui-a-Tara by AVL Appearances: D Wood for the Appella...
Pokeno West Limited v Waikato District Council IN THE ENVIRONMENT COURT AT AUCKLAND I TE KŌTI TAIAO O AOTEAROA KI TĀMAKI MAKAURAU Decision [2024] NZEnvC 208 IN THE MATTER OF an appeal under clause 14 of Schedule 1 to the Resource Management Act 1991 BETWEEN POKENO WEST LIMITED WEST POKENO LIMITED (ENV-2022-AKL-000084) Appellants AND WAIKATO DISTRICT COUNCIL Respondent AND MANFEI COMPANY LIMITED PARMINE INVESTMENTS LIMITED AS MAPLE HOMES LIMITED PERR...
...VW, and several other unit owners (the appellants), in their opposition to the body corporate’s (BC) application for a reinstatement scheme pursuant to s 74 of the Unit Titles Act 2010 (UTA), first in the High Court, and then in the Court of Appeal.2 [4] Mr VW alleges Ms EX and Mr TY (a) wrongly advised him and his co-appellants to appeal the High Court’s interim judgment, and (b) overcharged them by invoicing them nearly double the fee estimate provided for the appeal. [5]...