Search Results

1. Motu v Rapihana - Pukepoto 8B15B3B Residue (2022) 256 Taitokerau MB 150 (256 TTK 150) [pdf, 242 KB]

   ...Farmhouse Bakeries Ltd v Harvey Bakeries Ltd [1985] 2 NZLR 129. 3 Henry Roach (Petroleum) Pty Ltd v Credit House (Vic) Pty Ltd [1976] VR 309 at 311. 256 Taitokerau MB 195 be brushed over lightly.4 In Roseneath Holdings Ltd v Grieve, the Court of Appeal summarised the essential purpose of an interim injunction:5 The object of an interim injunction is to protect the plaintiff from harm occasioned by any breach of rights, that is the subject of current litigation, for which the p...

2. O'Connor v Macdee McLennon Construction Limited [2012] NZWHT Auckland 14 [pdf, 170 KB]

   ...originally claimed were accepted as being in excess of the $25,000.00 per unit that usually applied. [29] Generally an award of $25,000 per unit for occupiers is made based on the decisions of William Young P and Baragwanath J in the Court of Appeal in O’Hagan v Body Corporate 189855 3, Mok v Bolderson, 4 and Cao v Auckland City Council 5. Accordingly, the appropriate joint award to the claimants for general damages is $25,000 for anxiety, disappointment, physical inconvenien...

3. Dovey Property Holdings Limited – Orokawa 3B Part Lot 8 DP41892 (2013) 57 Taitokerau MB 75 (57 TTK 75) [pdf, 126 KB]

   ...than that for which the proceedings are properly designed and exist, or where the plaintiff in the proceedings is seeking some collateral advantage beyond what the law offers. [37] Counsel also brought my attention to the decision of the Court of Appeal of England and Wales in Gilham v Browning, where May LJ noted: “There is a clear public interest, in addition to the interests of individual litigants, that litigation should be justly, speedily and economically conducted and to...

4. CAC20004 v Li & Ors [2015] NZREADT 6 [pdf, 179 KB]

   ...particular defendants. The fines are to be paid within three months of the date of this decision to the Registrar of the Authority at Wellington. 8 [40] Pursuant to s.113 of the Act, we record that any person affected by this decision may appeal against it to the High Court by virtue of s.116 of the Act. ______________________________ Judge P F Barber Chairperson ______________________________ Ms N Dangen Member ______________________________ Ms...

5. LCRO 158/2020 SA v KC (27 May 2022) [pdf, 199 KB]

   ...audio-visual means on 12 May 2022. In attendance were S, Mr KC and Mr RB.9 Nature and scope of review [22] The High Court has described a review by this Office in the following way:10 A review by the LCRO is neither a judicial review nor an appeal. Those seeking a review of a Committee determination are entitled to a review based on the LCRO’s own opinion rather than on deference to the view of the Committee. A review by the LCRO is informal, inquisitorial and robust. It invo...

6. Chase-Seymour - Paenoa Te Akau (2015) 114 Waiariki MB 195 (114 WAR 195) [pdf, 209 KB]

   ...formerly known Rangatira 8A10E and 8A14A. I made those orders conditional only on the survey of those blocks. I am therefore limited to those issues. Mr Fitzsimmon’s issues arise in relation to Rangatira 8A10B. It is open to Mr Fitzsimmons to appeal the orders should he wish to revisit the substantive matters concerning the partition orders made on 17 December 2012. [31] I therefore make an order determining that the partition orders made on 17 December 2012 be amended per s...

7. Wellington v Wellington - Estate of Henare Haehae Wellington (2015) 104 Taitokerau MB 156 (104 TTK 156) [pdf, 187 KB]

   ...Court and this court is bound to act on that grant. If someone wishes to dispute, for example, the proper execution of a will for which 6 Hodgson – Ropata Wharetoetoe Rare (2004) 34 Gisborne Appeal MB 120 (30 APGS 120). 7 Ibid at MB 124. 104 Taitokerau MB 161 probate has been granted, then that case would have to be decided by the High Court as it has sole jurisdiction on matters of probate. [22] In Tahuparae Judge A...

8. DN v EO LCRO 263/2013 (31 August 2015) [pdf, 44 KB]

   ...has broad powers to conduct her own investigations, including the power to exercise for that purpose all the powers of a Standards Committee or an investigator, and seek and receive evidence. The statutory power of review is much broader than an appeal, and gives the LCRO discretion as to the approach to be taken on any particular review and the extent of the investigations necessary to conduct that review. 1 Deliu v Hong [2012] NZHC...

9. BORA Births, Deaths, Marriages, and Relationships Registration Bill [pdf, 249 KB]

   ...rationally connected with the objective, impair freedom of expression no more than is reasonably necessary, and are in due proportion to the importance of the objective. The limits are small and tightly constrained, and an individual can, under cl 30, appeal a decision to not register a name to the Family Court within 28 working days after the decision was made and the affected party notified. 15. We therefore conclude that the limits on what a person’s name can be are justified for t...

10. Shepherd v Popata – Konoti A No5 South 2B2 (2013) 57 Taitokerau MB 47 (57 TTK 47) [pdf, 347 KB]

    ...evidence presented in Cout1, and reject Waaka and Norman Popata's challenges to the vesting orders for the following reasons. [l7] First, there has never been any challenge to the vesting orders in the past. That is, there has never been an appeal or an application to the Chief Judge to cOlTect a "mistake". Thus, the transactions have remained unchallenged for over 40 years and are assumed to be conclusive: s 77 of the 1993 Act. [l8] Second, I reject Norman Popata...