Search Results

1. [2011] NZEmpC 78 NZ Tramways and Public Passenger Transport Employees Union & Ors v Wellington City Transport Ltd [pdf, 93 KB]

   ...intention of the parties in the context of their employment relationship and evidence in relation to past practices under the provisions in question which are long-standing, having been carried over through successive collectives. As the Court of Appeal recently noted, historical considerations such as the way in which the parties have approached particular provisions in past CEAs can be used to assist in their construction. 6 [22] The second question of law posed by the applica...

2. Dennett v Te Tumu Paeroa - Rotohokahoka D North 2A (2017) 178 Waiariki MB 24 (178 WAR 24) [pdf, 283 KB]

   ...Samuels v Matauri X Incorporation – Matauri X Incorporation (2009) 7 Taitokerau Appellate MB 216 (7 APWH 216). These principles were recently endorsed by the Māori Appellate Court in Bratton v Le Lievre [2017] Māori Appellate Court MB 351 (2017 APPEAL 351). 178 Waiariki MB 30 (b) Costs normally follow the event; (c) A successful party should be awarded a reasonable contribution to the costs that were actually and reasonably incurred; (d) The Māori Land Court has a ro...

3. INZ (Calder) v Horan [2019] NZIACDT 23 (23 April 2019) [pdf, 163 KB]

   ...Mr Horan rejects the Tribunal’s previous decision. He repeats his explanation and justification for his conduct given earlier to the Tribunal. He states that he will continue to stand by his actions which, if necessary, will be vindicated on appeal. Mr Horan describes the Code as a ridiculous “Code of Entrapment”. He denies that “we” (immigration advisers) are “the slaves of Africa”. According to him, the Authority and the Tribunal amount to a counterproductive co...

4. Broughton - Horowhenua 11B36 Sec 2L4A Kaiwiu Marae (2020) 424 Aotea MB 20 (424 AOT 20) [pdf, 260 KB]

   ...contract in which that person may be interested or concerned other than as a trustee of another trust. [19] Two important and leading authorities on the law concerning conflicts of interests in Māori land trusts are the decisions of the Court of Appeal Rameka v Hall and Naera v Fenwick.8 Then there is the equally relevant judgment of the Supreme Court Fenwick v Naera.9 In Naera v Fenwick citing the earlier authority of Re Thompson’s Settlement, the Court concluded that any invo...

5. [2010] NZEmpC 77 Poulter v Antipodean Growers Ltd [pdf, 37 KB]

   ...their own account. 6. Another matter which may assist in the determination of the issue is industry practice although this is far from determinative of the primary question. [21] Also, from the dissenting judgment of McGrath J in the Court of Appeal3 it can be concluded that ultimately it is necessary, having considered the formulaic approach adopted in the Employment Court in Bryson, to gain an overall impression of the underlying and true nature of the relationship between the p...

6. Data and Statistics Bill [pdf, 276 KB]

   ...requiring the Crown to prove the opposite; and, c. the penalty for the offence is proportionate to the importance of the Bill’s objective. Infringement offences 35. Although infringement offences do not result in a conviction11, the Court of Appeal in Henderson v Director, Land Transport New Zealand held that the rights in ss 24 and 25 of the Bill of Rights Act apply to minor offences dealt with under the infringement notice regime.12 36. Although we recognise this is not strictl...

7. Combined Owners and Residents of Apartments in Sheds 19 20 22 23 [pdf, 3.6 MB]

   ...rule E25,6,27, 12 The approach sought by the Submitter is supported by the As!:;essment, of Environmental Effects as this recognises that given the regional coastal provisions which form part of the AUP have been through the AUP process and no appeals an~ outstandi,ng that significant weight should be given, to these provisions and little or no weight should be given to the RCP, 13 The Marshall Day Report indicates that except for piling and concrete cutting all other construction a...

8. Review of the Foreshore and Seabed Act 2004 Post Consultation Decisions [pdf, 993 KB]

   ...14 59 The two options that involve the use of Courts require subsequent decisions to be made regarding the appropriate jurisdiction for the hearing of claims for recognition of customary interests, provisions relating to evidence and the appeal process. The table below provides a high level summary of analysis of the decisions required. The two options are the Māori Land Court or High Court and are set out below. Analysis/conclusions 60 Ove...

9. Brichris Holdings Limited v Irmac Builders Limited (in liquidation) [2012] NZWHT Auckland 7 [pdf, 105 KB]

   ...removal application by the architect but recorded that the claimant, the party opposing removal, needed to establish causation. At adjudication the claim against the architect failed but the Tribunal declined his application for costs. On appeal the District Court held that the Tribunal was wrong to conclude that the threshold for an award of costs under s91(1)(b) had not been met because the claimant failed to offer the necessary evidence of causation at hearing.17 Co...

10. BORA Securities Legislation Bill [pdf, 122 KB]

    ...penalty order and be liable for a fine under the relevant Act for the same conduct.[12] In respect of the civil liability provisions enabling compensation to be ordered in some instances, we draw your attention to the majority decision of the Court of Appeal in the leading case on 26(2), Daniels v Thompson[13] that made it clear that this section must be read as referring: Only to criminal proceedings relating to an offence against the law, for which the person has been tried. What is pr...