Search Results

1. Te Hokowhitu v Proprietors of Matauri X - Matauri X [2010] 2010 Maori Appellate Court MB 566 (2010 APPEAL 566) [pdf, 116 KB]

   ...MATAURI X MAC A20080005020 19 November 2010 IN THE MAORI APPELLATE COURT OF NEW ZEALAND TAITOKERAU DISTRICT 2010 MAORI APPELLATE COURT MB 566 (2010 APPEAL 566) A20080005020 UNDER Section 58, Te Ture Whenua Māori Act 1993 IN THE MATTER OF Matauri X BETWEEN MATIU TE HOKOWHITU Appellant AND PROPRIETORS OF MATAURI X Defendant Coram: Deputy Chief Judge C L Fox Judge STA Milroy Judge C T Coxhead Appearances: Martin Taylor (for the Appellant) Wayne C...

2. Annexure 2 - Scope Challenges [pdf, 281 KB]

   ...EPA.5 [4] The Environment Court, when considering the plan change, must apply cl 10(1) to (3) of Schedule 1 to the Act as if it were a local authority.6 Schedule 1 provides that the local authority must give a decision on the provisions and matters 1 Note: the court must consider all submissions filed whether or not the submitter is a party to the proceeding. 2 RMA, s 142(2). 3 Note: RMA, s 149E uses the term “proposed plan” and not “plan change”. Section 43AAC RMA d...

3. [2007] NZEmpC AC 28/07 Wilson v CE of Ministry of Social Development [pdf, 65 KB]

   WILSON V THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE MINISTRY OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT AK AC 28/07 23 May 2007 IN THE EMPLOYMENT COURT AUCKLAND AC 28/07 ARC 31/06 IN THE MATTER OF an election to have the matter heard in the Employment Court BETWEEN ELIZABETH WILSON Plaintiff AND THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE MINISTRY OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT Defendant Hearing: 29 and 30 March 2007 (Heard at Auckland) Appearances: Mark Ryan, Counsel for Plaintiff Michele Ryan, Counsel for Defenda...

4. AF v BN LCRO 166 / 2011 (25 July 2013) [pdf, 144 KB]

   ...the client in excess of its lending limits, which prejudiced its security. The property has been sold by the first mortgagee and no funds were available to meet the liability to General Finance. [3] Mr AF complained about Mr BN’s role in the matter. The Standards Committee determined to take no further action in respect of the complaint and Mr AF has applied for a review of that determination. Background [4] In April 2007 the law firm of [Law Firm 1] employed Mr BO as a legal...

5. LCRO 196/2016 GY v SO (15 September 2017) [pdf, 194 KB]

   ...possibly the United Kingdom, Ms GY thought that she may need a New Zealand parenting order for PM. She made an internet search for lawyers practising in [Town]. On 8 April 2016 at 1.10 pm she telephoned [Town] Family Law to make enquiries about that matter. [6] Ms GY informed the receptionist who answered her call that she wanted to make enquiries about obtaining a parenting order. The receptionist requested her name, PM’s name, and then Mr YR’s name for the stated purpose of...

6. Rogers v Wiringi - Succession to Ngahuiatapu Rogers [2024] Chief Judge's MB 1844 (2024 CJ 1844) [pdf, 272 KB]

   ...Court. As the Chief Judge, or Deputy (acting on delegation) are judges of the Court, I consider that we must be able to exercise the powers of the Court in performing our function pursuant to s 44 of the Act to ensure we can serve the interests of justice. However, I am open to hearing from the parties with respect to this matter. [5] As neither party to the proceedings made submissions on whether or not I had jurisdiction to determine the present application, I granted the app...

7. LCRO 180/2022 HB v UC and JW (26 November 2024) [pdf, 216 KB]

   ...give rise to breaches under the RCCC by Messrs UC and JW worthy of further investigation’.5 [13] Mr MG included with the letter of complaint copies of correspondence which he said were “correspondence between Mr HB and Messrs UC and JW on this matter …”. [14] He submits that resolution of the complaint would include reimbursement to Mr HB of legal fees to date ($4,045.35) together with any further legal costs Mr HB may incur “in relation to this matter going forward”.6 [...

8. MacGregor v Craig (Application for Witness Summonses) [2015] NZHRRT 51 [pdf, 236 KB]

   ...attached. This seemed inherently undesirable for the additional reason that the non-publication orders would be jeopardised. [8.2] The form of the order sought provided no mechanism for the filtering of the requested documents by reference to such matters as privilege, confidentiality and relevance. [8.3] In some instances the particular passages in the witness briefs did not in fact make reference to any document. In addition, in one instance the witness was asked to produce not onl...

9. Smith v Smith - Nuki o Te Hapū Tahawai ki Rataroa Whānau Trust [2019] Māori Appellate Court MB 110 (2019 APPEAL 110) [pdf, 332 KB]

   2019 Māori Appellate Court MB 110 IN THE MĀORI APPELLATE COURT OF NEW ZEALAND TAITOKERAU DISTRICT A20180007223 APPEAL 2018/17 UNDER Section 58, Te Ture Whenua Māori Act 1993 IN THE MATTER OF An appeal against an order of the Māori Land Court made on 12 July 2018 at 175 Taitokerau MB 257-326 in respect of Nuki o Te Hapū Tahawai ki Rataroa Whānau Trust and Ngā Uri o Ngāti Pakahi Trust BETWEEN BRYCE PEDA SMITH Applicant AND...

10. Kapua - Estate of Ngamotu Paora [2019] Chief Judge's MB 1162 (2019 CJ 1162) [pdf, 389 KB]

    2019 Chief Judge’s MB 1162 THE MĀORI LAND COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WAIĀRIKI DISTRICT A20140009320 CJ 2014/24 UNDER Section 45, Te Ture Whenua Māori Act 1993 IN THE MATTER OF Paora te Hiko also known as Ngamotu Paora or Te Koti Paora CONCERNING IVY WAITANGI KAPUA Applicant Hearing: 14 May 2019, 2019 Chief Judge’s MB 704-718 (Heard at Rotorua) Judgment: 4 November 2019 FURTHER DIRECTION OF DEPUTY CHIEF JUDGE C L FOX