Search Results

1. [2009] NZEmpC CC 7/09 Heritage Expeditions Ltd v Fraser [pdf, 37 KB]

   ...position. [20] The second difference flows from this. Where a party allows the prescribed time to expire before taking any steps, the opposing party is led to believe that the right will not be exercised. Where the right in question is one of appeal or challenge to a decision already made in favour of the other party, that party will have been led to believe that the decision at first instance was final and enforceable. In such circumstances, being deprived of that certainty is s...

2. [2007] NZEmpC AC 24/07 Jeffries v Adis International Ltd [pdf, 47 KB]

   ...Mr Ryan for the plaintiff referred not only to Binnie but also to Victoria University of Wellington v Alton-Lee [2001] 1 ERNZ 305 (CA) and Health Waikato Ltd v Elmsly [2004] 1 ERNZ 172 (CA), and submitted that these “triumvirate” of Court of Appeal decisions have established the principles to be applied by the Employment Court in fixing costs. He submitted that the first step is to decide whether the costs actually incurred were reasonable and to make adjustments if they were n...

3. Scott v Sullivan - Karamu AY Section 2 (2013) 27 Takitimu MB 5 (27 TKT 5) [pdf, 127 KB]

   ...satisfactorily; or (b) Because of lack of competence or prolonged absence, the trustee is or will be incapable of carrying out those duties satisfactorily. [24] In Rameka v Hall, on the issue of the relevant principles regarding removal, the Court of Appeal, citing with approval the approach of the Māori Appellate Court, stated: 6 [30] The settled approach in the Māori Appellate Court in applying s 240 is to make an assessment of these standard duties together with what the...

4. Jones - Pukawa D3 Trust (2015) 124 Waiariki MB 217 (124 WAR 217) [pdf, 246 KB]

   ...formally notified. 30. There is no authority for the Court to dismiss an application during the course of a judicial conference. Accordingly the order dismissing the applications has been made in excess of jurisdiction. We, therefore, uphold the appeal on this ground and order a rehearing. 7 Keepa v Vercoe - Ruatoki B92 [2015] Māori Appellate Court MB 189 (2015 APPEAL 189) citing Karena v George – Karaka Huarua A and B (2002) 6...

5. Couper v Paki - Lloyd Alexander Couper (2012) 281 Aotea MB 156 (281 AOT 156) [pdf, 173 KB]

   ...rehearing, the Court may affirm its former determination, or may vary or annul that determination, and may exercise any jurisdiction that it could have exercised on the original hearing. (6) When a rehearing has been granted, the period allowed for an appeal to the Māori Appellate Court shall not commence to run until the rehearing has been disposed of by a final order of the Court. 281 Aotea MB 161 [21] The Māori Appellate Court recently considered the issue of rehearings...

6. [2014] NZEmpC 108 Hamon v Coromandel Independent Living Trust [pdf, 81 KB]

   ...in this Court is that costs will follow the event and usually an award will be made amounting to 66 percent of the actual and reasonable costs incurred by the successful party. These principles have now been well established in three Court of Appeal decisions dealing with the issue of costs in this Court; Victoria University of Wellington v Alton-Lee, 3 Binnie v Pacific Health Ltd, 4 and Health Waikato Ltd v Elmsly. 5 The principles have recently been reconfirmed by the Court...

7. Karaitiana v Carroll – Matahiwi No 4B, Waipuka 2R Sec 3 and Waipuka 3A3A (2014) 29 Takitimu MB 214 (29 TKT 214) [pdf, 205 KB]

   ...support or opposition was then undertaken, based on the available evidence, which revealed the opposite outcome, as the following tables confirm: 7 [2011] Māori Appellate Court MB 428 (2011 APPEAL 428); 8 See Reid v Trustees of Kaiwaitau 1 Trust (2006) 34 Gisborne Appellate Court MB 168 (34 APGS 168) and Brown v Māori Appellate Court (2001) 1 NZLR 87 9 [2011] Māori Appellate Court MB 428 (2011 APPEAL 428); 10 Bidois v T...

8. Fapiano v Tarau (2013) 24 Takitimu MB 46 (24 TKT 46) [pdf, 198 KB]

   ...associated with the land: (d) Other owners of the land who are members of the hapū associated with the land: (e) Whāngai of the testator: (f) Trustees of persons referred to in any of paragraphs (a) to (e) of this section. … [22] In the Court of Appeal in Kameta v Nicholas considered s 108(2)(c).6 The issue was whether the Nicholas children were related by blood to Mr Kameta. The Court of Appeal considered that: [26] … the phrase “related by blood” is not intended to...

9. Auckland Standards Committee v Murray [2015] NZLCDT 6 [pdf, 142 KB]

   ...cancel her fee. [d] We further note the tragic circumstances of this man’s death, and its reported effects upon Ms Murray, were relied on by her as a mitigating feature in her District Court sentencing. [22] All three of these decisions were appealed by Ms Murray to the Legal Complaints Review Officer (“LCRO”) and were upheld in all but minor respects. Ms Murray’s conduct in attempting to delay or thwart the process of review by the LCRO followed a similar pattern of la...

10. CAC 20005 v Drever [2014] NZREADT 101 [pdf, 40 KB]

    ...6.1 to comply with fiduciary obligations to the client. [10] The context was an auction process of February 2011 where the defendant failed to advise the vendor that the settlement date did not accord with the vendor’s instructions. After an appeal to this Tribunal by the vendor, penalty was settled on the basis of a reimbursement payment of $1,463.15 from the defendant and a co- offender. [11] The second previous case was about a property purchaser on 20 November 2011 misled by th...