14079 items matching your search terms
IN THE DISTRICT COURT AT WELLINGTON I TE KŌTI-Ā-ROHE KI TE WHANGANUI-A-TARA [2021] NZACC 99 ACR 264/18 UNDER THE ACCIDENT COMPENSATION ACT 2001 IN THE MATTER OF AN APPEAL UNDER SECTION 162 OF THE ACT BETWEEN NICOLE SCOTT Applicant AND ACCIDENT COMPENSATION CORPORATION Respondent Hearing: On the papers Judgment: 6 July2021 ____________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT OF JUDGE A A SINCLAIR [O...
[2018] NZSSAA 58 Reference No. SSA 58/18 IN THE MATTER of the Social Security Act 1964 AND IN THE MATTER of an appeal by XXXX of XXXX against a decision of a Benefits Review Committee BEFORE THE SOCIAL SECURITY APPEAL AUTHORITY S Pezaro - Deputy Chair K Williams - Member C Joe - Member Hearing at AUCKLAND on 7 November 2018 Appearances The appellant in person I Ji, agent for the Ministry of Social Development DECISION Background [...
..._____________________________________________________________ Representatives: XXXX in person. Ministry of Social Development for the Chief Executive [2023] NZSSAA 6 Reference no: NZSSAA 73/22 IN THE MATTER of the Social Security Act 2018 AND IN THE MATTER of an Appeal by XXXX of Auckland against a decision of the Chief Executive that has been confirmed or varied by a Benefits Review Committee. BEFORE THE SOCIAL SECURITY APPEAL AUTHORITY G Pearson...
...Decision: 16 February 2012 COST DETERMINATION Adjudicator: K D Kilgour COSTS APPLICATION BY AUCKLAND COUNCIL [1] The Council was removed from this proceeding on 10 September 2010 in Procedural Order No 7. [2] The claimants appealed that determination and also judicially reviewed the Eligibility Decisions of the Department of Building and Housing and of the Chair of this Tribunal to the High Court. [3] The appeal and judicial review was heard before Woolford...
[2019] NZSSAA 12 Reference No. SSAA 82/18 IN THE MATTER of the Social Security Act 2018 AND IN THE MATTER of an appeal by XXXX of XXXX against a decision of a Benefits Review Committee BEFORE THE SOCIAL SECURITY APPEAL AUTHORITY S Pezaro - Deputy Chair K Williams - Member C Joe - Member Hearing at Hamilton on 22 January 2019 Appearances The appellant in person xxxx, support person for the appellant A Katona, agent for the Ministry of So...
Airbnb Australia Pty Limited v New Plymouth District Council IN THE ENVIRONMENT COURT AT AUCKLAND I TE KŌTI TAIAO O AOTEAROA KI TĀMAKI MAKAURAU Decision [2024] NZEnvC 045 IN THE MATTER OF an appeal under clause 14 of the First Schedule of the Resource Management Act 1991 BETWEEN AIRBNB AUSTRALIA PTY LIMITED (ENV-2023-AKL-000090) Appellant AND NEW PLYMOUTH DISTRICT COUNCIL Respondent Court: Environment Judge MJL Dickey sitting alone under s 279 of the Act...
pSWLP – STAY IN THE ENVIRONMENT COURT AT CHRISTCHURCH I TE KŌTI TAIAO O AOTEAROA KI ŌTAUTAHI Decision No. [2023] NZEnvC 39 IN THE MATTER of the Resource Management Act 1991 AND of appeals under clause 14 of the First Schedule of the Act BETWEEN ARATIATIA LIVESTOCK LIMITED (ENV-2018-CHC-29) (and all other appellants listed in the Schedule attached) AND SOUTHLAND REGIONAL COUNCIL Respondent Court: Environment Judge J E Borthwick sitting alone under s 279 of the A...
[2011] NZACA 1 ACA 014/08 IN THE MATTER of the Accident Compensation Act 1982 AND IN THE MATTER of an appeal pursuant to s.107 of the Act BETWEEN WILHEMUS BOSMAN of Christchurch Appellant AND ACCIDENT COMPENSATION CORPORATION a body corporate duly constituted under the provisions of the said Act Respondent BEFORE THE ACCIDENT COMPENSATION APPEAL AUTHORITY P J Cartwright APPEARANCES J Miller for appellant Paul McBride for r...
BEFORE THE REAL ESTATE AGENTS DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL [2015] NZREADT 85 Reference No: READT 014/15 IN THE MATTER OF an appeal under s.111 of the Real Estate Agents Act 2008 BETWEEN BRIAN MUDGE Appellant AND REAL ESTATE AGENTS AUTHORITY (CAC307) First Respondent AND GARETH ROBINS Second Respondent MEMBERS OF TRIBUNAL Ms K Davenport QC - Deputy Chairperson Ms N Dangen - Member Mr J Gaukrodger - Member APPEARANCES Ap...
...that the application for strike-out should be dismissed. [4] The second issue is whether orders relating to disclosure of disparity documents, as made in my first interlocutory judgment, should be stayed pending determination by the Court of Appeal of ASB’s application for leave to appeal that judgment. ASB’s application to this effect is also opposed. Background [5] In the first interlocutory judgment, I outlined the background to the challenges which are before the Cour...