Search Results

1. Waitangi Tribunal - District 12 Wellington District [pdf, 13 MB]

   ...TPD WP LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS Appendices to the Journals of the House of Representatives Appendices to the Journals of the Legislative Council Alexander Tombull Library British Parliamentary Papers: Colonies New Zealand (17 vols, Shannon, Irish University Press, 1968-<i9) Crown Congress Joint Working Party chapter Church Missionary Society certificate oftitIe Dictionary o/New Zealand Biography document Department of Survey and Land Information enclosure footnote Journals an...

2. Geldenhuys v C Yap [2013] NZIACDT 42 (15 July 2013) [pdf, 141 KB]

   ...to a professional 4 disciplinary offence: Complaints Committee of Waikato Bay of Plenty District Law Society v Osmond [2003] NZAR 162 (HC). [26] Rehabilitation of a practitioner is an important factor when appropriate (B v B HC Auckland, HC4/92, 6 April 1993). In Patel v Complaints Assessment Committee (HC Auckland CIV-2007- 404-1818, 13 August 2007), the Court stressed when imposing sanctions in the disciplinary process applicable to that case, that it was necessary to...

3. Vincent v Kennedy - Estate of Carol Fleet (2019) 185 Taitokerau MB 148 (185 TTK 148) [pdf, 328 KB]

   ...MAUREEN VINCENT and JOHN FLEET Applicants AND NATHAN KENNEDY Respondent Hearing: 22 October 2015, 117 Taitokerau MB 76-85 25 – 26 July 2016, 136 Taitokerau MB 141-269 21 March 2018, 171 Taitokerau MB 151-179 (Heard at Auckland) Appearances: C Hockly, for Applicants P Majurey, for Respondent D Abbot, for Estate of Carol Ngawhira Tanui Fleet Judgment: 31 January 2019 JUDGMENT OF JUDGE M P ARMSTRONG

4. Auckland Standards Committee 4 v Kennelly [2022] NZLCDT 31 (1 September 2022) [pdf, 130 KB]

   ...[41], PURSUANT TO S 240 OF THE LAWYERS AND CONVEYANCERS ACT 2006. NEW ZEALAND LAWYERS AND CONVEYANCERS DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL [2022] NZLCDT 31 LCDT 028/21 IN THE MATTER of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 BETWEEN AUCKLAND STANDARDS COMMITTEE 4 Applicant AND PATRICK KENNELLY Respondent DEPUTY CHAIR Dr J G Adams MEMBERS OF TRIBUNAL Mr S Hunter QC Ms K King Ms M Noble Prof D Scott HEARING 24 August 2022 HELD AT...

5. [2025] NZEmpC 5 Harte v MERAS [pdf, 337 KB]

   ...4A which directly supports the proposition that the section was intended to rule out claims of this sort.14 A senior legal commentator has expressed the same conclusion.15 [22] Most recently, in Wiles v The Vice-Chancellor of the University of Auckland, Judge Holden concluded that damages for breach of the statutory duty of good faith are not contemplated by the Act.16 She said that the Act provides remedies for breach of s 4, as set out in s 4A, and in respect of collective barga...

6. [2022] NZEnvC 212 Kristin School Charitable Trust v Auckland Council [pdf, 7.3 MB]

   Kristin School Charitable Trust v Auckland Council IN THE ENVIRONMENT COURT AT AUCKLAND I TE KŌTI TAIAO O AOTEAROA KI TĀMAKI MAKAURAU Decision [2022] NZEnvC 212 IN THE MATTER OF an appeal under clause 14 of the First Schedule of the Resource Management Act 1991 BETWEEN KRISTIN SCHOOL CHARITABLE TRUST (ENV-2022-AKL-000107) Appellant AND AUCKLAND COUNCIL Respondent AND BEI GROUP LIMITED Applicant Court: Environment Judge MJL Dickey sitting alone under...

7. [2012] NZEmpC 157 Pottinger and Nine Dot Consulting Ltd and Carew v Kelly Services (NZ) Ltd [pdf, 77 KB]

   ...cases involving disputes and interim applications. He referred to Davis v Bank of New Zealand 4 by way of example. There the Court expressed the view, in a brief judgment, that: 5 2 Victoria University of Wellington v Alton-Lee [2001] ERNZ 305 (CA) at [48]. 3 Binnie v Pacific Health Ltd [2002] 1 ERNZ 438 (CA) at [14]. 4 WC 4/05, 18 February 2005. 5 At [6]. While the principles in Binnie are well established and routinely...

8. [2015] NZEmpC 159 Smith Crane & Construction Ltd v Hall [pdf, 184 KB]

   ...applying schs 2 and 3 of the High Court Rules (HCR). This Court is of course not bound to apply those Schedules, but from time to time they can be useful when considering the amounts 7 Victoria University of Wellington v Alton-Lee [2001] ERNZ 305 (CA), Binnie v Pacific Health Ltd [2002] 1 ERNZ 438 (CA); Health Waikato Ltd v Elmsly [2004] 1 ERNZ 172 (CA); and Belsham v Ports of Auckland Ltd [2014] NZCA 206, [2014] ERNZ 66. 8 Wills...

9. Jackman v CAC 10010 & Cussen & Hale [2011] NZREADT 29 [pdf, 94 KB]

   ...registered architect. [20] We are satisfied that there is no evidence of any intention of the licensees to mislead any member of the public. [21] We consider that Mr Tatton is literally and technically an architect who works as such and holds a university degree in architecture. [22] It is not correct to assert that a person cannot in fact be an “architect” simply because legislation provides that they cannot call themselves an architect. 6 [23] If Parliament...

10. Belle v Fogi Ltd (Strike-Out Application) [2019] NZHRRT 7 [pdf, 241 KB]

    ...vexatious; or (d) is otherwise an abuse of process. … [25] Section 115A mirrors r 15.1 of the High Court Rules, which, until s 115A was inserted in November 2018, had guided the approach of the Tribunal to applications for strike-out: Mackrell v Universal College of Learning HC Palmerston North CIV-2005-485- 802, 17 August 2005 at [48]. [26] The principles to be applied are clear and well established. They are set out by Richardson P in Attorney-General v Prince and Gardner [1998] 1...