Search Results

1. Nottingham & Property Bank Realtor Ltd v CAC 10057 & Honey [2014] NZREADT 80 [pdf, 98 KB]

   ...of law or principle; (2) taking account of irrelevant considerations; (3) failing to take account of a relevant consideration; or (4) the decision is plainly wrong. …” … [18] Considering all of these matters and the important function of protection of the public contained in the purposes of the Act (s.3) we consider there is no general rule preventing an appeal [from a decision not to refer misconduct charges] being considered by this Tribunal, however we consider that the Trib...

2. [2013] NZEmpC 81 Brake v Grace Team Accounting Ltd [pdf, 191 KB]

   ...explained that the plaintiff would be replacing Ms Janine Edgar, a senior accountant who was about to go on parental leave. The plaintiff was concerned that should Ms Edgar come back from parental leave, during which her position would have been protected, the plaintiff might then have been made redundant. The plaintiff was assured that her role was not conditional on Ms Edgar’s return and that her role was permanent. The defendant acknowledged, in a letter dated 26 April 2010,...

3. [2015] NZEmpC 147 Rodkiss v Carter Holt Harvey Ltd [pdf, 268 KB]

   ...costs and disbursements in the sum of $16,052.85. Ms Ironside explained that the legal costs were incurred as from 27 March 2013 when Mr Rodkiss had been falsely accused of serious misconduct and was required to take urgent legal steps to try and protect his job. The defendant rejected the Calderbank offer and made no counterproposal. [26] Ms Ironside submitted that although the Calderbank offer was given no weight by the Authority in its costs determination, it is relevant to thi...

4. Kendal v Sherbourne LCRO 69 / 2009 (19 August 2009) [pdf, 57 KB]

   ...at p 811). It is against these standards that the conduct of Ms Sherbourne is to be tested. When did Ms Sherbourne commence acting for Ms Kendal? [27] Mr John Kendal asserts that prior to 10 June 2005 Ms Sherbourne should have taken steps to protect the interests of Ms Kendal. He argues that it was unwise for Ms Kendal to be building on land that she did not own and also that Ms Sherbourne had an obligation to ensure that the price paid was reached by the method that Ms Kendal u...

5. Wall v The Maori Land Court - Tauhara Middle 15 Trust and Tauhara Middle 4A2A Trust [2010] 2010 Maori Appellate Court MB 55 (2010 APPEAL 55) [pdf, 175 KB]

   ...and that the incumbent trustees could not stand. [44] In that decision Judge Harvey alluded to the reasons set out in his second decision of 30 July 2008 but did not repeat or enlarge on them. He went on to say at paragraph 18: “But in the careful balancing required, given the adverse findings that have been made, and in the absence of a tenable defence, any application by the former trustees for reinstatement at this juncture is, with respect, not sustainable when section 222 of...

6. Teina Pora compensation claim quantum report [pdf, 9 MB]

   ...injunction. 72 . The Crown acknowledges that information about reward payments should have been released more promptly but otherwise defends the Police actions as professional and reasonable. I do not agree with that assessment. I acknowledge that care was required with the release of information about the Rewa enquiry in order to ensure that the privacy of victims was protected. I accept there were genuinely held differences of opinion over the involvement of the defence in further...

7. Trustees of Owhaoko C Trust v Karena - Owhaoko C Trust (2017) 59 Takitimu MB 288 (59 TKT 288) [pdf, 436 KB]

   ...where the Court stated: [33] It is inappropriate to strike out a claim summarily unless the court can be certain that it cannot succeed. The case must be “so certainly or clearly bad” that it should be precluded from going forward. Particular care is required in areas where the law is confused or developing. [26] In the recent decision of Commissioner of Inland Revenue v Chesterfields Preschools Ltd, the Court of Appeal also considered the requirements for striking out an app...

8. Wickliffe v Pearce - Paengaroa North B4B and K Aggregated (2005) 289 Rotorua MB 236 (289 ROT 236) [pdf, 5.9 MB]

   ...and must not profit fi-om their role: Peach v Jagger (1910) 30 NZLR 423. A seminal statement on the issue of investment of trust funds can be found in III re Whitely (1886) 33 Ch D 347. It was stated in that case that a trustee should take such care as an ordinary prudent person would take if minded to make an investment for the benefit of others whom the trustee felt morally bound to provide. This general proposition is of course now embodied in sections 13 Band 13 C of the Trustee Act...

9. [2021] NZACC 50 - Astle v ACC (17 March 2021) [pdf, 224 KB]

   ...compost at The Warehouse last week. Has had back problems in the past but had been good leading up to this event. Felt pain when lifted and twisted. Pain is across L3/4 with pain felt in SI jts. Back seems to lock up and can’t walk. Is protecting back. Hurts to walk and drive. [5] On 7 November 2005, she again saw the doctor who recorded: Works as a tracker for CTFs. Is in a lot of pain with driving etc. Has had physio, no benefit; and has seen a chiropractor, again...

10. Edwards – Whakatōhea (2018) 183 Waiariki MB 169-194 (183 WAR 169) [pdf, 534 KB]

    ...Claims Trust recently recognised by the Crown. There has accordingly been a plethora of evidence filed regarding the mandate of Whakatōhea. As the parties are well aware, those are live issues currently before the Waitangi Tribunal and we are careful not to encroach on that jurisdiction. [8] This application only considers mandating issues to the extent that those are relevant to the review of the s 30 order made in 1994. Background The 1994 s 30 order [9] Claude Edwards...