12987 items matching your search terms
...Taitokerau District AP-20230000020306 A20220015884 WĀHANGA Under Section 240, Te Ture Whenua Māori Act 1993 MŌ TE TAKE In the matter of Awarua A25 I WAENGA I A Between TE RINA MANA-TUKAHA Te kaitono Applicant ME And JANET LOWRY Te kaiurupare Respondent Nohoanga: Hearing 21 May 2024 (Heard at Kaikohe) Whakataunga: Judgment date 7 June 2024 TE WHAKATAUNGA Ā KAIWHAKAWĀ M P ARMSTRONG Judgmen...
...Member Mr BK Neeson, Member REPRESENTATION: Mr BDN Forrest in person Ms D Harris for defendant DATE OF DECISION: 5 September 2014 DECISION OF TRIBUNAL REFERRING COMPLAINT BACK TO HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION Introduction [1] By application dated 2 September 2014 the Chief Executive of the Department of Corrections (Corrections) applies to have this matter referred back to the Human Rights Commission under s 92D of the Human Rights Act 1993 for mediation. During a telec...
...NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND I TE KŌTI TAKE MAHI O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU [2023] NZEmpC 42 EMPC 319/2021 IN THE MATTER OF a challenge to a determination of the Employment Relations Authority AND IN THE MATTER OF an application for costs BETWEEN RAN CHEN Plaintiff AND WNY GROUP LIMITED First Defendant AND LI WU Second Defendant Hearing: On the papers Appearances: Plaintiff in person J Wickes, counse...
...ZEALAND CHRISTCHURCH I TE KŌTI TAKE MAHI O AOTEAROA ŌTAUTAHI [2020] NZEmpC 157 EMPC 139/2018 IN THE MATTER OF a challenge to a determination of the Employment Relations Authority AND IN THE MATTER OF an application for costs BETWEEN GEORGE COWAN Plaintiff AND CHARLES KIDD IN PARTNERSHIP WITH GEOFFREY KIDD, TRADING AS KIDD PARTNERSHIP Defendant Hearing: On the papers Appearances: J R Copeland...
...matter. [9] The order is therefore entirely necessary. The penalty orders sought by the Standards Committee are straightforward, they are the order under s 242(h)(ii). Further orders are also sought in relation to costs and this morning an oral application has been made seeking compensation for the complainant pursuant to s 156(1)(d) of the Act which provides a sum of up to $25,000.00 can be awarded where any act or omission of a practitioner or former practitioner or employee or...
...2010 IN THE MAORI LAND COURT OF NEW ZEALAND TAITOKERAU DISTRICT 7 TAITOKERAU MB 125 (7 TTK 125) A20100008406 IN THE MATTER OF Kapowai A1A, A1B, A2A, A2B1, A2B2, A3, C1 and C2 Blocks ML 12835 ML 12839 DEPUTY REGISTRAR Applicant (Heard at Whangarei) Judgment: 30 June 2010 RESERVED JUDGMENT OF JUDGE D J AMBLER Introduction [1] A survey requisition has been issued under s 332 of Te Ture Whenua Maori Act 1993 (“1993 Act”) in relation...
...viewed by those people who are “experts” in accumulating them. Each year, New Zealanders receive about 2.7 million infringement offence notices. The majority of people pay the relevant fee to the prosecuting authority within the time allowed. A few request a court hearing to contest the notice or seek a reduction in penalty. A somewhat larger number however, just do not pay. About 37% of infringements by volume, or 54% by value, are then passed to the courts for enforcement action. 41%...
140 Taitokerau MB 39 IN THE MĀORI LAND COURT OF NEW ZEALAND TAITOKERAU DISTRICT A20150004107 UNDER Section 18(1)(a), Te Ture Whenua Māori Act 1993 IN THE MATTER OF Utakura No. 8 BETWEEN FRED POMARE Applicant A20150001238 UNDER Section 18(1)(a), Te Ture Whenua Māori Act 1993 IN THE MATTER OF Utakura No. 8 AND BETWEEN WIREMU POMARE Applicant Hearing: 24 September 2015 27 January 2016 (Heard at...
' A " Ngati Pahauwera CMT/PCR Application Area rairoa Raupunga W aihua Mohaka This map is current as at 9/11/2012 CO Mapptng by G eo s pa Ba I Solutions Ltd. O ctober 2012 M O J 2012-053 DUPLICATE C W ^ l l O R a n g a h a u a W h a n u i D i s t r i c t i r e WAIROA JOY HIPPOLITE N o v e m b e r 1996 W o r k i n g P a p e r : F i r s t R e l e a s e W A IT A N G I T R I B U N A L R A N G A H A U A W H A N U I SERIES This is the exhibit marked “ C...
...than 3 m in all areas. The appellant opposes the Council's arnendments to the conditions as an increase from 70% to 85% is not necessary, and it is impractical to expect 85% of the plants to survive and be in a healthy condition. It is also claiming that it is not appropriate to require plants to grow to 3 m in all areas as many of the plants identified do not grow to that height. [18] The Council considers that the condition should be retained as6 : 5 6 (a) the appellant...