Search Results

1. BORA Securities Legislation Bill [pdf, 122 KB]

   ...CONCLUSION 31. In accordance with your instructions, we attach a copy of this opinion for referral to the Minister of Justice. Roger Palairet Acting Chief Legal Counsel Office of Legal Counsel Stuart Beresford Senior Legal Adviser Bill of Rights/Human Rights Team cc Minister of Justice Footnotes 1 R v Keegstra [1990] 3 SCR 697,729,826. 2 RJR MacDonald v Attorney-General of Canada (1995) 127 DLR (4th)1 3 Advice dated 31 October 2001. 4 Clause 30 – New Subpart 3...

2. Canterbury Westland Standards Committee 2 v A Practitioner [2020] NZLCDT 32 (13 October 2020) [pdf, 117 KB]

   ...charges to be finally resolved, the matter came before the Tribunal on 23 July 2020. [2] Although his job was made very difficult by the circumstances, counsel for the Standards Committee, Mr van Schreven, is to be commended for the sensitive and humane way with which he has been prepared to not only deal with the delays, but also to accommodate the changes in this practitioner as his [redacted] health improved. The practitioner was eventually able to participate in a productive dialo...

3. QD v L Ltd [2023] NZDT 551 (19 September 2023) [pdf, 198 KB]

   ...actual knowledge of the consumer’s purpose (because it is a common purpose) there is no need for an express notification of the consumer’s expectation that the service will be fit for that common purpose. 13. Where the failure is independent of human control, the consumer has no right of redress (s 33 CGA). Was L Ltd entitled to cancel the contract? 14. L Ltd says it fulfilled its obligations under the contract when it cancelled the booking. It says conditions 6.1, 14.1 and 15....

4. TSO v Hassan [2013] NZIACDT 52 (16 August 2013) [pdf, 125 KB]

   ...[57] Section 50 contemplates a complaint being upheld without necessarily imposing a sanction. It follows that it is not necessary to find that a disciplinary sanction should be imposed to uphold a complaint. Not every lapse or manifestation of human frailty should result in an adverse professional disciplinary finding. There will be occasions when advisers are responsible for a lapse from acceptable standards, but that still does not justify upholding a disciplinary complaint. [58...

5. 2022-03-22 Willowridge Developments Ltd & Remarkables Park Ltd - Supplementary Evidence - Claire Hunter - 22 March 2022 [pdf, 477 KB]

   ...including cumulative effects, and consideration of trends in the quality of the receiving water body; and (e) Any adverse effect of any discharge from the site on: i. Kāi Tahu cultural and spiritual beliefs, values and uses ii. Any natural or human use value iii. Use of water bodies or the coastal marine area12 for contact recreation and food gathering and measures to avoid, remedy or mitigate these adverse effects. 12 Bec...

6. Chief Victims Advisor to Government Briefing for the Incoming Minister of Justice November 2020 [pdf, 279 KB]

   ...other ministries and regulatory bodies • NGOs, independent victim advocates, and victim focussed academics • independent Commissions and Commissioners such as the Ombudsman, Privacy Commissioner, the Independent Police Conduct Authority, the Human Rights Commission, the Children’s Commission, and Health and Disabilities Commission • the legal profession • the judiciary • international victim experts (for example the United Kingdom and Australian Victims Commissione...

7. TB v DF Ltd [2020] NZDT 1370 (9 October 2020) [pdf, 227 KB]

   ...not meet the required standard…, [DF Ltd] is not responsible for that if it was outside of its control. The [CGA] provides that [DF Ltd] is not responsible for any redress where a service is not fit for purpose because of a cause independent of human control.” 19. What DF Ltd is referring to is section 33 of the CGA which says (in part) that the consumer cannot make a claim for breach of the fitness for purpose guarantee where that guarantee was breached for reasons beyond the con...

8. LCRO 77/2021 GS and VU v CN and SW (23 March 2022) [pdf, 149 KB]

   ...Lawyer (3rd ed, LexisNexis, Wellington, 2016) at [4.3.2]. 10 Standards Committee determination, above n 1 at [17]. 8 • Mr VU needed to be careful he did not breach the requirements of rr 3.1 and 4.1.1, and the general requirements of the Human Rights Act 1993 not to discriminate against Mrs MM • Mr VU had obtained confirmation from Mrs MM’s doctor, that she was capable of engaging a lawyer for legal representation. This was supported by a report from a forensic psych...

9. [2022] NZACC 65 – Estate of Margaret Taiapa v ACC (21 April 2022) [pdf, 199 KB]

   ...section 20(2)(e) to (h)). Section 25(1)(a)(i) provides that “accident” means a specific event or a series of events, other than a gradual process, that involves the application of a force (including gravity), or resistance, external to the human body. Section 25(3) notes that the fact that a person has suffered a personal injury is not of itself to be construed as an indication or presumption that it was caused by an accident. [28] In Johnston,1 France J stated: [11] It is co...

10. [2018] NZEnvC 109 V T Taueki v Horowhenua District Council [pdf, 796 KB]

    ...is an archaeological site as defined in the Heritage Act: archaeological site means, subject to section 42(3),- (a) any place in New Zealand, including any building or structure (or part of a building or structure), that- (i) was associated with human activity that occurred before 1900 or is the site of the wreck of any vessel where the wreck occurred before 1900; and (ii) provides or may provide, through investigation by archaeological methods, evidence relating to the history of...