Search Results

1. [2017] NZEmpC 128 ALA v ITE [pdf, 242 KB]

   ...and/or non-publication order is appropriate, given the nature of responsibilities or other features of a particular party. Then, if a party is dissatisfied with the way in which the jurisdiction is exercised, that person may test that conclusion on appeal. [57] In the case of the first compliance order, ITE exercised his rights, seeking leave to appeal on a point of law to the Court of Appeal, which was declined; 16 and to the Supreme Court, which was also declined. 17 Neithe...

2. [2017] NZEmpC 30 Lumsden v Skycity Management Ltd [pdf, 222 KB]

   ...the Mediator signs the agreed terms of settlement: The settlement is final and binding on and enforceable by us; and except for enforcement purposes, neither of us may seek to bring these terms before the Authority or Court whether by action, appeal, and application for review, or otherwise; and the terms of the settlement cannot be cancelled under section 7 of the Contractual Remedies Act 1979; and that section 149(4) provides that a person who breaches an agreed term of sett...

3. LCRO 159/2014 AB and RJ v OC and BR [pdf, 209 KB]

   ...fell below the requisite standard as she did not attend to matters in a timely fashion, while at the same time conveying an impression that work was in hand. (b) Ms OC’s failure to advise the clients about their options of judicial review or appeal were significant failures. (c) There were many examples of Ms OC’s failure to respond to the clients in a timely manner and failures to communicate. (d) Ms OC acknowledged that she did not complete the retainer, despite there bein...

4. BORA Insolvency Law Reform Bill [pdf, 382 KB]

   ...Zealand). A bankrupt is able to leave New Zealand where she or he is not taking property which ought to be divided among creditors, or with the permission of the Assignee, and an Assignee cannot unreasonably withhold consent. Furthermore, a bankrupt can appeal the Assignee's decision under clause 224 (Appeal from Assignee's decision). 31. We consider that the limitations clauses 420 and 427(1)(f) place on the right to leave New Zealand as affirmed in section 18(3) of the Bill o...

5. LCRO 201/2017 ZK v XM (29 June 2018) [pdf, 288 KB]

   ...scope of review [22] The nature and scope of a review have been discussed by the High Court, which said of the process of review under the Act:3 … the power of review conferred upon Review Officers is not appropriately equated with a general appeal. The obligations and powers of the Review Officer as described in the Act create a very particular statutory process. The Review Officer has broad powers to conduct his or her own investigations including the power to exercise for tha...

6. Te Kani - Mangatawa No 9B, No3B, No 2B Block (2020) 201 Waikato Maniapoto MB 168 (201 WMN 168)) [pdf, 359 KB]

   ...Proprietors of Mangakino v Māori Land Court CA 65/99, 16 June 1999. 25 Re Duke of Norfolk’s Settlement Trusts [1982] Ch 61, [1981] 3 All ER 220. 201 Waikato Maniapoto MB 176 [31] In Ngai Tai Ki Tamaki Tribal Trust v Karaka, the Court of Appeal confirmed that the Court has inherent jurisdiction to authorise, either prospectively or retrospectively, remuneration for a trustee.26 [32] I accept that the Māori Land Court may exercise the inherent jurisdiction available t...

7. Body Corporate 81738 v Wellington City Council [2010] NZWHT Wellington 15 [pdf, 205 KB]

   ...2 HC Auckland, CIV-2004-404-3230, 30 April 2008. 14 access to the manufacturers’ specifications no greater detail would be required to achieve a workmanlike result. This was upheld on appeal3 where Baragwanath J said: [121] I agree with the Judge. No purpose would be served by requiring a designer to incur the cost of providing detail not reasonably necessary for the task. There being no carelessness it is unnecessary to

8. Johanson v Williams - Tokaipuritia Williams [2019] Chief Judge's MB 995 (2019 CJ 995) [pdf, 538 KB]

   ...orders in favour of the 13 children of the deceased made at 102 Taitokerau MB 216-222 (19 March 2015) was 4 [2009] Chief Judge’s MB 209(2009 CJ 209) 5 [2010] Maori Appellate Court MB 167 (2010 APPEAL 167) 2019 Chief Judge’s MB 1005 erroneous in fact or in law because of any mistake or omission on the part of the Court or in the presentation of the facts of the case to the Court. (4) If there was any error in fact o...

9. LCRO 7/2018 AB v CD (26 November 2019) [pdf, 165 KB]

   ...scope of review [15] The nature and scope of a review have been discussed by the High Court, which said of the process of review under the Act:1 … the power of review conferred upon Review Officers is not appropriately equated with a general appeal. The obligations and powers of the Review Officer as described in the Act create a very particular statutory process. 1 Deliu v Hong [2012] NZHC 158, [2012] NZAR 209 at [39]–[41]....

10. LCRO 39/2019 Yuri Lukas v BW and CV (29 November 2019) [pdf, 151 KB]

    ...complaint that: Towards the end of 2016, I began to have some misgivings about BW’s ability to secure a visa, given the number that had been lodged by Mr Lucas [sic] and given the scarcity of the information coming from Mr Lucas about those visas and appeals. [9] In April 2017 Mr BW was notified by INZ to leave New Zealand. Dr CV says this came as a shock to both of them as Mr Lukas had not “indicated anything was amiss”.6 [10] Mr BW and Dr CV left New Zealand in May 2017 wi...