Search Results

1. Legal Complaints Review Officer v Morrison [2018] NZLCDT 40 [pdf, 339 KB]

   ...the Act). 4. Mr Morrison is to refund to the New Zealand Law Society the costs of the Tribunal in full (pursuant to s 249 of the Act). 5. The existing orders for non-publication are to continue in force pending the outcome of Mr Morrison’s appeal to the High Court. 6. The order for suspension is not to come into force until the outcome of the appeal. DATED at AUCKLAND this 27th day of November 2018 BJ Kendall Chairperson...

2. Cooper v Corrections [2019] NZHRRT 23 [pdf, 201 KB]

   ...sentence, consultation with the employer is required because of the need to monitor offenders during the working day. Without such contact, a community-based sentence would not be supported. [38] In R v Willing (1997) 15 CRNZ 340 (CA), the Court of Appeal considered the exception in Principle 11(e)(iv). The Court endorsed a statement made by Hammond J in R v Parsons (1995) 2 HRNZ 166 (HC), that the purpose of the exception in Principle 11(e)(iv), is intended to ensure that law enforce...

3. Justice Matters - issue 05 - December 2016 [pdf, 3 MB]

   ...difference to New Zealanders’ lives. Since 2013 there has been an overall reduction of 30% achieved in areas where the majority of New Zealanders interact with the court system, that is District Court category 1 criminal cases, High Court civil appeals, and the specialist courts and tribunals. We’ve improved our timeliness by focusing on clearing old cases first and improving the speed and quality of court administrative processes. It’s now time to take a new, modified a...

4. Paerau v Trustees of Te Komiti 1B2B2 Ahu Whenua Trust (2017) 147 Taitokerau MB 241 (147 TTK 241) [pdf, 212 KB]

   ...connected by whakapapa to the land and each other. On occasion, an award of costs will frustrate this aim. 13 Nicholls v Nicholls – Part Papaaroha 6B Block [2011] Māori Appellate Court MB 64 (2011 APPEAL 64). 147 Taitokerau MB 246 [17] Mr Paerau is a beneficiary of the whānau trust, which in turn is a beneficiary of this trust. As such, it could be argued that an award of costs is not appropriate in this case as it...

5. [2017] NZEmpC 45 Ports of Auckland Ltd v Findlay [pdf, 125 KB]

   ...their course without undue interruption and delay. A stop-start approach to an investigative and disciplinary process which invites intervention along the way from the Authority; the Employment Court on a challenge; and potentially the Court of Appeal and Supreme Court by way of further appeal; is plainly undesirable for public policy reasons. [24] In the present case, a number of concerns have been raised as to the propriety of aspects of the employer’s process, some of whic...

6. O'Reilly v Registrar of the Real Estate Agents Authority [2016] NZREADT 78 [pdf, 172 KB]

   ...application) to notify the Registrar of any “… changes in your circumstances impacting your eligibility to hold a licence”. [43] Pursuant to s 113 of the Act, the Tribunal draws the parties’ attention to s 116 of the Act, which sets out appeal rights. Any appeal must be filed in the High Court within 20 working days of the date on which the Tribunal’s decision is served. The procedure to be followed is set out in part 20 of the High Court Rules. _______________...

7. Real Estate Agents Authority (CAC 403) v Drever [2016] NZREADT 72 [pdf, 131 KB]

   ...of Charged Conduct Nature of Conduct Substantive Decision Penalty Decision CA4825587 January–February 2011 Conduct relating to instructions for sale by auction 22 August 2011 Unsatisfactory conduct 4 November 2011 Censured (appealed by Complainant; settlement reached) CB5858318 November 2011 Did not provide Guides, provided insufficient information relating to subdivision, did not insert material particulars on sale and purchase agreement, did not advise...

8. LCRO 59/2016 and 61/2016 DE and QV v Standards Committee (27 September 2018) [pdf, 175 KB]

   ...TG also made mention of the fact that he considered all three lawyers were entitled to a consideration of their past careers. 11 [54] All of these comments are accepted and Mr TG’s concerns are reinforced by comments made by the Court of Appeal in New Zealand Law Society v B where the Court said:10 A censure or reprimand, however expressed, is likely to be of particular significance in this context because it will be taken into account in the event of a further complaint again...

9. [2019] NZEnvC 061 Tonea Investments NZ Ltd v Auckland Council [pdf, 6.1 MB]

   ...instruments [36] The approach to the interpretation of plan provisions is well settled and usefully summarised in a recent decision of the Court, Budden v Auckland Council.s In that decision the Court applied the approach taken by the Court of Appeal in Powell:6 (35) ... While we accept it is appropriate to seek the plain meaning of a rule from the words themselves, it is not appropriate to undertake that exercise in a vacuum. As this Court made clear in Rattray, regard must be had...

10. Watene v Edwards - Mangaroa X (2021) 87 Takitimu MB 190 (87 TKT 190) [pdf, 321 KB]

    ...that directly or indirectly affects any contract in which that person may be interested or concerned other than as a trustee of another trust. [22] An important authority on the role of trustees in the adherence to their duties is the Court of Appeal judgment Rameka v Hall.7 In that decision, the Court confirmed that trustees of Māori land remain bound by orthodox terms of trust and trust law principles 7 Rameka v Hall [2013] NZCA 203. See also Apatu v Trustees of Owhaoko C...