Search Results

1. IK v VR LCRO 227/2014 (21 December 2015) [pdf, 102 KB]

   ...facts as the complaints referred to in paragraph [1] above. Separate Standards Committee decisions followed the fees complaint and the IK complaint; those decisions are the subject of separate applications for review and Mr AW is acting in those matters also. [6] This review is confined to the Standards Committee decision with the identifying number 7854; that is to say the prosecution decision and the unsatisfactory conduct finding in relation to the terms of engagement complaint. Ba...

2. Tahere v Tau - Rangihamama X3A and Omapere Taraire E (Aggregated) (2017) Māori Appellate Court MB 62 (2017 APPEAL 62) [pdf, 232 KB]

   2017 Māori Appellate Court MB 62 IN THE MĀORI APPELLATE COURT OF NEW ZEALAND TAITOKERAU DISTRICT A20170001285 Appeal 2017/3 UNDER Section 58 of Te Ture Whenua Māori Act 1993 IN THE MATTER OF An appeal by Toko Tahere, Fletcher Tahere and Canadian Tahere pursuant to s 58 of Te Ture Whenua Māori Act 1993 against an order of the Māori Land Court made on 20 September 2016 at 137 Taitokerau MB 68-105 in respect of RANGIHAMAMA X3A AND OMAPERE TARAIRE E (...

3. Mr X v CAC10026 & Mr C [2012] NZREADT 42 [pdf, 151 KB]

   BEFORE THE REAL ESTATE AGENTS DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL Decision no: [2012] NZREADT 42 Reference no: READT 106/11 IN THE MATTER OF an appeal under s.111 of the Real Estate Agents Act 2008 BETWEEN Mr X Defendant/Appellant AND REAL ESTATE AGENTS AUTHORITY (CAC 10026) First respondent AND Mr C Second respondent MEMBERS OF TRIBUNAL Judge P F Barber - Chairperson Ms J Robson - Member Mr G Denley - Member BY CONSENT HEARD ON THE PAPERS DATE...

4. Proactive release - Setting the strategic direction for New Zealand's Anti-Money Laundering and Countering Financing of Terrorism Regime [pdf, 1.4 MB]

   © Crown Copyright, Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) Hon Andrew Little Minister of Justice Proactive release – Setting the strategic direction for New Zealand’s Anti-Money Laundering and Countering the Financing of Terrorism Regime Date of issue: 9 December 2019 The following documents have been proactively released in accordance with Cabinet Office Circular CO (18) 4. Some information has been withheld on the basis that it would not, if requested un...

5. [2022] NZEmpC 127 VMR v Aviation Security Service Division of Civil Aviation Authority [pdf, 304 KB]

   ...10 Auckland District Health Board v X (No 2) [2005] ERNZ 551 (EmpC) at [35]. [25] In assessing s 178 criteria, there is no presumption in favour of or against removal. To do so would undermine Parliament’s clear intent that while some matters ought to be dealt with in the Authority, for others, because of their nature or circumstances, that is not the appropriate methodology.11 [26] While there is no discretion available to order removal, there is one to allow an applica...

6. O Ltd v B Ltd [2023] NZDT 480 (21 September 2023) [pdf, 235 KB]

   ...roughly handwritten, was provided late, and was difficult to decipher. A result of this was that two batches were produced too late for a planned trade show. He had considered O LTD’s conduct regarding this as unacceptable, but had not taken the matter further because B Ltd’s business was, in any event, coming to an end at that point. OS said that O LTD had created the necessary information, but had not sent it on to KH because KH had not asked for it. KH had communicated when he nee...

7. [2017] NZEmpC 166 Sawyer v VC of Victoria University [pdf, 425 KB]

   ...penalty should be reduced because of Dr Sawyer’s financial circumstances.11 This application [11] The determination has been challenged by Dr Sawyer. She considers the penalty should not have been imposed and she seeks a hearing de novo. The matters raised in her statement of claim can be summarised as: 9 At [43]. 10 Borsboom (Labour Inspector) v Preet PVT Ltd and Warrington Discount Tobacco Ltd [2016] NZEmpC 143. The Authorit...

8. Tana v Mahanga - Pukahakaha East 5B (2024) 270 Taitokerau MB 272 (270 TTK 272) [pdf, 293 KB]

   ...Land Court of New Zealand Taitokerau District AP-20230000028606 A20220004045 AP-20230000028782 A20220011759 AP-20230000035151 WĀHANGA Under Sections 43 and 231, Te Ture Whenua Māori Act 1993 MŌ TE TAKE In the matter of Pukahakaha East 5B and others I WAENGA I A Between HONE TANA Te kaitono Applicant ME And GRAHAM MAHANGA, HANA MAXWELL, JOANNE WALTERS, TAIPARI MUNRO AND VALERIE TIMBERS AS TRUSTEES OF THE PUKAHAKA...

9. Brown v Edmonds - Succession to Kuini Brown and Mate Ihipera Rewi Tamehana [2021] Chief Judge's MB 988 (2021 CJ 988) [pdf, 294 KB]

   ...KOOTI WHENUA MĀORI O AOTEAROA I TE ROHE O TE TAIRĀWHITI In the Māori Land Court of New Zealand Tairāwhiti District A20190009456 CJ 2019/31 WĀHANGA Under Section 45, Te Ture Whenua Māori Act 1993 MŌ TE TAKE In the matter of Succession to Kuini Brown ME And Succession to Mate Ihipera Rewi Tamehana also known as Maude Thompson I WAENGA I A Between KENNETH TANA BROWN Te Kaitono Applicant ME And SARAH ANNE E...

10. Lt and QT v OT Ltd [2021] NZDT 1430 (16 March 2021) [pdf, 213 KB]

    ...[14] In my view, Mr R was responsible for the initial damage done to the fence. His removal of the garage, his failure to deal with the resulting gap, and his subsequence removal of palings and fence posts, were all unjustified. I do not think that it matters whether or not the fence was exactly on the boundary. The existing fence was treated as the boundary fence by the parties. In any event, the evidence that I was given did not establish whether Mr R’s assertion that the previous fence...