Search Results

1. CAC301 v Murphy [2015] NZREADT 42 [pdf, 211 KB]

   ...direct the Registrar to arrange a Directions Hearing by telephone between our chairperson and the parties to arrange a timetable to deal with penalty. [100] Pursuant to s.113 of the Act, we record that any person affected by this decision may appeal against it to the High Court by virtue of s.116 of the Act. ______________________________ Judge P F Barber Chairperson ______________________________ Ms N Dangen Member ______________________________ Ms C...

2. The Māori Trustee - Poike 8E (2015) 101 Waikato Maniapoto MB 286 (101 WMN 286) [pdf, 272 KB]

   ...debt is satisfied; t) These interests, rights and duties are substantive interests, rights and duties that crystallised on commencement of the legislation in 1987 and are preserved by s 17(1)(b) of the Interpretation Act 1999; u) The Court of Appeal discussed s 18 of the Interpretation Act 1999 in Foodstuffs (Auckland) Limited v Commerce Commission, 18 and qualified its application to where there are existing (vested) interests, rights and duties at the time of the repeal, com...

3. August National Panui 2021 [pdf, 3.4 MB]

   ...Chief Judge's MB 51-59 on 8 February 2012 - Application to the Chief Judge A20210008483 58/93 Rachel Witana Omapere Taraire E & Rangihamama X3A Ahu Whenua Trust and a decision made at 229 Taitokerau MB 133-160 (19 April 2021) - Notice of Appeal A20210008502 58/93 Tuhoe Te Uru Taumatua Trust Appeal 2021/4 Tuhoe Te Uru Taumatua Trust - and orders made at 252 Waiariki MB 157-179 (21 April 2001) - Notice of Appeal Here-Turi-Kökä / AUGUST 2021 - NATIONAL PÄNUI 49 Legisla...

4. [2006] NZEmpC AC 63/06 Whelan v Attorney-General for CE of the Children and Young Persons Service [pdf, 112 KB]

   ...but reduced it for some mitigating factors relating to the counselling he had received to $45,000. In making that assessment I had regard to recent cases dealing with post-traumatic stress disorder or similar injuries. In Gilbert the Court of Appeal did not interfere with an award of $75,000 for general compensatory damages for distress. In Brickell v Attorney-General [2000] 2 ERNZ 529 the High Court awarded $75,000 and in Benge v Attorney-General [2000] 2 ERNZ 234 some four month...

5. Canterbury Westland Standards Committee v Simes [2012] NZLCDT 4 [pdf, 194 KB]

   ...19 This principle has been discussed and accepted in a number of cases arising in the context of legal fee reviews; D’Allessandro $ D’Angelo v Bouloudas and Another [1992] 10 WAR 191; Sharatt v London Central Bus Co. Ltd and other appeals [2003] 4 All ER 590 20 Ibid, at 218lines 40 - 50 and 219 lines 50 - 53 21 Supra, at 211 lines 11 - 32 22 See Section 241 Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006, read in conjunction with Sections 11 and 14 17 present in the court o...

6. Hall v Auckland Council [2012] NZWHT Auckland 6 [pdf, 228 KB]

   ...Hall and Mr Binnie were prudent purchasers who obtained reports and accepted the recommendation of the report writer to obtain a maintenance report and implement a maintenance schedule. [92] In Coughlan v Abernethy15 White J considered an appeal by the Abernethys against the Tribunal‘s decision to reduce the damages awarded for contributory negligence. The Abernethys purchased their house in 2003 after obtaining a building report which identified a number of defects incl...

7. Auckland Standards Committee 2 v Holland [2022] NZLCDT 9 (3 March 2022) [pdf, 216 KB]

   ...question, let alone the disgrace of losing the privileged status, the underpinnings of which these disciplinary proceedings guard by our findings. Among the cases referred to in LexisNexis Laws of New Zealand, to which he referred, is a 1932 Court of Appeal decision44 which is cited for the proposition that an honest muddler may still be guilty of professional misconduct. In that case, the practitioner mixed his own funds with trust funds. In the present case, we could not charac...

8. [2019] NZREADT 49 - CAC 521 v Wright (13 November 2019) [pdf, 287 KB]

   ...49 - Wright decision. The Tribunal will then issue a separate decision as to the costs application, in due course. [94] 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 J Doogue Member _...

9. Fruean v Knuckey - Waitara West 52D (2023) 475 Aotea MB 284 (475 AOT 284) [pdf, 371 KB]

   ...include the word “necessary”, the test for removal of a trustee is desirability, not necessity. The Court goes on to note that there is little guidance in the Act 5 Henderson v Brooking - Wharekahika A47 [2023] Māori Appellate Court MB 17 (2023 APPEAL 17). 6 Above n 5 at [35]. 475 Aotea MB 303 as to what is meant by “desirable.” After considering relevant dictionary definitions, the Appellate Court said:7 The courts have historically assessed applications for re...

10. Ram v Tan [2016] NZIACDT 39 (9 August 2016) [pdf, 207 KB]

    ...there can be no complaint if the Tribunal draws the unfavourable evidentiary inference which absence from the witness box commonly attracts. [25] In Ithaca (Custodians) Ltd v Perry Corporation [2004] 1 NZLR 731 (CA) at [153]-[154], the Court of Appeal considered what inferences may be drawn from the absence of witnesses. The Court observed: The absence of evidence, including the failure of a party to call a witness, in some circumstances may allow an inference that the missing evidence...