Search Results

1. LCRO 152/2015 FR v CB and WT (15 May 2017) [pdf, 200 KB]

   ...15 Letter from Lawyers Complaints Service to LT (10 October 2014). 6 [22] On 2 March 2015 FR advised the Complaints Service that “it is impracticable to comment by the 4th March. I will comment as promptly as my commitments permit”. He also requested the Complaints Service to provide the following information: (a) Reference to the number of will cases taken to court by WT in the five years prior to 2010 and their outcome i.e. won or lost; (b) The Law Society...

2. Kennedy v Scanner Investments Ltd [pdf, 169 KB]

   ...determine a claim will not be affected by the failure of a respondent to serve a response under s.28, or the failure of a respondent to provide specific information requested, or the failure to attend the hearing. Under these circumstances, I am permitted to draw any inferences that I may think fit, and determine the claim on the basis of the information available to me.

3. Federated Farmers of New Zealand.pdf [pdf, 332 KB]

   ...use change Through regulation of land use change under Policy 2 (c) and Rule 3.11.4.9, that the Decisions restrict land use flexibility in a manner that is inconsistent with Part 2 of the RMA; That the Decisions Version, in finding that permitted farming Give effect to the reasons for the appeal by: (a) Deleting Rule 3.11.4.9 so that the use of land for farming is governed by Rules 3.11.4.1 to 3.11.4.8; or (b) If the Rule is not deleted, by reinstating the expiry date...

4. [2008] NZEmpC WC 19A/08 Snowdon v Radio New Zealand Ltd [pdf, 45 KB]

   ...19-20: …The doctrine of estoppel is one founded on considerations of justice and good sense. If an issue has been distinctly raised and decided in an action, in which both parties are represented, it is unjust and unreasonable to permit the same issue to be litigated afresh between the same parties or persons claiming under them; . . . [21] Mr Moodie’s submissions acknowledged that the process of disclosure had resulted in a number of orders and decisions of the Emp...

5. Stender v Evans - Tokata A15 (2006) 75 Ruatoria MB 214 (75 RUA 214) [pdf, 283 KB]

   ...application to set aside an area of Tokata AIS as an urupa or cemetery. The Court reserved its decision on that date. A full written judgment was released on 9 September 2004 recorded at 68 RUA 131-141. In that judgment I granted the order under S.I3S/93 permitting the change of status on the basis that:- (a) Mr Evans needed to raise development finance; (b) Mr Evans would need to file a written undertaking that he will not sell Tokata A IS and that he would return to the Maori Land...

6. Accident Compensation Corporation v Smith [2015] NZACA 05 [pdf, 161 KB]

   ...irrelevant, given that the recall obtained here was based on an error of fact, which could not have been the subject of an appeal to the High Court. [30] It is not correct that appeals are restricted to questions of law, as section 111 of the 1982 Act permits the High Court to consider any question which, by reason of its general or public importance or for any other reason, ought to be submitted to the High Court. Such a question could involve a dispute of fact. In any event, wh...

7. [2019] NZEmpC 44 Clarke v GEA Processing Engineering Ltd [pdf, 245 KB]

   ...omitted). [20] The Court guards its discretion over costs, but as a matter of practice it does not lightly allow a plaintiff to displace the presumption that costs follow discontinuance. We make three points. [21] First, the Court does permit a plaintiff to show that its discontinuance should not be interpreted as failure; the proceeding having ended unilaterally rather than by judgment, the Court is prepared, in a clear case, to recognise that the plaintiff may have ac...

8. Tucker v Real Estate Agents Authority (Application for Closed Hearing) [2019] NZHRRT 49 [PDF, 287 KB]

   ...[86] the Tribunal held that the higher the impact on open justice, the greater the degree of persuasion required to satisfy the desirability threshold: [80] In our view not all of the many circumstances which might conceivably fit the exceptions permitted by HRA, s 107(3) will have the same significance to the general rule of open justice. Some circumstances will impact on open justice to a greater degree than others. As a consequence the degree of persuasion to satisfy the desirability...

9. [2015] NZSSAA 014, 13 March [pdf, 58 KB]

   ...have been no documentation of this and there is no precise figure as to what is owing. [42] Not only does XXXX pay for the outgoings on the house, including the power, but she also pays for the running expenses in relation to the car. XXXX is permitted to use the vehicle. [43] Moreover, while it is alleged that the appellant and his wife cook and eat separately, we infer from XXXX evidence that there is an understanding between them that XXXX is able to consume whatever f...

10. (9) Hamilton City Council [pdf, 321 KB]

    ...wetland may be necessary. 19. Relevantly, the ongoing maintenance of infrastructure wetlands for treating stormwater is ordinarily required through conditions of resource consent for stormwater discharge, issued by WRC, or are controlled by permitted activity standards in the Waikato Regional Plan3. 2 Gross pollutants include litter such as plastics, paper, cans, pieces of wood and other detritus that gets dropped or discarded in road corridors or carparks and becomes e...