Search Results

1. Stebbing – Tauhara Middle 4A 2B 2C (Opepe Farm Trust) (2014) 92 Waiariki MB 218 (92 WAR 218) [pdf, 144 KB]

   ...Appointment of trustees [11] In addition to its core business activities, the trust has been involved in significant litigation over a number of years. Those proceedings were finally concluded on these substantive issues by the judgment of the Court of Appeal Rameka v Hall.3 The only matter outstanding is the questions of what if any costs are payable by the unsuccessful parties. Doubtless the proceedings overall have proved to be a significant distraction to the trust, both in ter...

2. Falp - Succession to Bernard Albert Falp (2022) 449 Aotea MB 210 (449 AOT 210) [pdf, 295 KB]

   ...Leshia is unsure how to respond to requests for her view or it may be that she does not have a strong view one way or another. [35] I have set out my reasons so that Leshia may consider them and exercise her right to apply for a rehearing or an appeal if she disagrees with the basis for my decision. Ngā ōta Orders [36] Pursuant to s 113 of the Act, the Court determines that the persons entitled to succeed to Bernard’s Māori land interests are: (a) Stephanie Helen Rose Fal...

3. [2022] NZEmpC 126 Henderson Travels Ltd v Kaur [pdf, 194 KB]

   ...fails.5 [19] The discretion is broad but must be exercised in the interests of justice. The interests of both parties need to be carefully weighed up. The required balancing exercise in weighing up those interests was summarised by the Court of Appeal in McLachlan v MEL Network Ltd:6 [15] The rule itself contemplates an order for security where the plaintiff will be unable to meet an adverse award of costs. That must be taken as contemplating also that an order for substantia...

4. Knuckey v Telford - Wahapakapaka 7A (2021) 435 Aotea MB 68 (435 AOT 68) [pdf, 202 KB]

   ...1 or more responsible trustees, and may appoint 1 or more advisory trustees and 1 or more custodian trustees. [13] The decision Clarke v Karaitiana is a leading authority on the appointment of trustees and at paras [51] and [52], the Court of Appeal underscored both the importance of the views of trust beneficiaries as well discretion of the Court in making appointments that considers relevant factors, including skills and experience and the potential for conflicts of interest.6...

5. [2021] NZEmpC 127 AlKazaz v Deloitte (No. 3) Ltd [pdf, 194 KB]

   ...Deloitte (No. 3) Ltd (formerly known as Asparona Ltd) [2021] NZEmpC 126. 6 Applying via reg 6 of the Employment Court Regulations 2000 which do not deal with applications to cross examine on affidavits. [11] In Kidd v van Hereen, the Court of Appeal held that the words “special circumstances” are wide, comprehensive, and flexible indicating something abnormal, uncommon or out of the ordinary, but something less than extraordinary or unique.7 The Court in that case obser...

6. ZA v YB LCRO 164/2013 Recusal (31 August 2016) [pdf, 98 KB]

   ...to his discovery obligations. Costs were reserved, with the Commissioner seeking a substantial amount from the plaintiffs, as well as from Dr Muir, who was not a party to the litigation. His Honour declined to recuse himself. [40] The Court of Appeal set out the “principles which govern this area of the law” referring to the necessity for impartiality, the duty to sit, presumptive and apparent bias. 10 Section 27 of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 was referred to as...

7. Acoustic (dated 6 June 2017) [pdf, 308 KB]

   1 BEFORE THE ENVIRONMENT COURT CHRISTCHURCH REGISTRY ENV-2016-CHC-47 IN THE MATTER of an appeal under Section 120 Resource Management Act 1991 BETWEEN BLUESKIN ENERGY LIMITED Appellant AND DUNEDIN CITY COUNCIL Respondent ACOUSTICS – JOINT WITNESS STATEMENT 6 June 2017 2 Introduction 1. Expert conferencing on acoustics was undertaken between Malcolm Hunt (engaged by Dunedin C...

8. [2021] NZREADT 39 - Lee (29 July 2021) [pdf, 243 KB]

   ...New Zealand Inc v Northland Regional Council [2019] NZHC 449, at [31]. 2021 NZREADT 39 - Lee - Penalty (003) [33] Pursuant to s 113 of the Act, the Tribunal draws the parties’ attention to s 116 of the Act, which sets out the right of appeal to the High Court. The procedure to be followed is set out in part 20 of the High Court Rules. __________________ Hon P J Andrews Chairperson _________________ Mr G Denley Member ____...

9. [2019] NZEmpC 93 ITE v ALA [pdf, 278 KB]

   ...judgment; and the basis for such an order was not then spelt out adequately. [9] It is also relevant that after the issuing of the judgment of the external court, the Supreme Court issued a judgment dealing with an application for leave to appeal brought by ITE; that application was dismissed. For present purposes the key point is that the most senior court in this jurisdiction recognised that this Court’s non-publication orders were to be maintained. Accordingly, it anony...

10. Allison - Te Waiti 2C2 (2001) 77 Ōpōtiki MB 37 (77 OPO 37) [pdf, 1.6 MB]

    ...(whether by way of injunction or otherwise). The extensive supervisory role played by the Maori Land Court over Maori land trusts has been discussed in In Re Proprietors of Mangakino Township v Maori Land Court 16/6/99, CA 65/99 where the Court of Appeal has discussed the effect of these two provisions as follows: 'Trusts are a development of judge made law and courts of equity have for centuries undertaken the function 'of supervising them. The Maori Land Court is expressly...