Search Results

1. Reedy v Atkins - Waitangi A1 A1 (2019) 76 Tākitimu MB 54 (76 TKT 54) [pdf, 362 KB]

   ...arguments. He then exercised his discretion in favour of Mr Ashby. We do not detect any error in the judge’s approach when disposing of these applications. Consequently, we see no reason why the lower Court decision should be disturbed. The appeal must be dismissed. [15] For completeness, we note that the Appellant has made a number of submissions on what might be termed constitutional issues. While her interpretation of the various cases cited was patently incorrect, we do...

2. [2018] NZEnvC 180 McKay [pdf, 752 KB]

   ...Principles of Real Property Law (2nd ed, LexisNexis, Wellington, 2014) at 3.004(a). John Burrows (ed) Land Law (online looseleaf ed, Brookers) at C06. Resource Management Act 1991, ss 339(2)(b) and 340. [35] This approach has now been upheld on appeal. 14 [36] The texts referred to by the High Court address these concepts in detail, as did Dr Palmer's submissions before me as amicus. Relevantly, a lease creates a leasehold estate which is less than the freehold and is therefore...

3. [2020] NZEmpC 142 Kwik Kiwi Cars Ltd T/A Mark Cromie Motor Group v Crossley [pdf, 308 KB]

   ...termination were being adopted in light of serious problems arising from the economic difficulties and technological changes experienced in many countries in recent years. [50] Although New Zealand has not ratified the Convention, the Court of Appeal has recognised that s 66 of the Act gives effect to it.5 [51] Next, she referred to dicta in Canterbury Westland Free Kindergarten Assoc (t/a Kidsfirst Kindergartens) v New Zealand Educational Institute, which emphasised that “reas...

4. Tapsell - Succession to Pera Wikiriwhi or Pera Matataia [2021] Chief Judge's MB 1002 (2021 CJ 1002) [pdf, 485 KB]

   ...213-231 (2021 CJ 213-231). 24 Ashwell – Rawinia or Lavinia Ashwell (nee Russell) [2009] Chief Judge’s MB 209 (2009 CJ 209). 25 Tau v Nga Whanau O Morven & Glenavy – Waihao 903 Section IX Block [2010] Māori Appellate Court MB 167 (2010 APPEAL 167). 2021 Chief Judge’s MB 1020 [16] However, for the benefit of the parties, I note that s 44 explicitly refers to situations where the Court has made an incorrect decision due to a flaw in the evidence presented, or in...

5. [2021] NZEnvC 018 Hadley v Waterfall Park Developments Limited [pdf, 1.5 MB]

   ...interpretation of subordinate statutory instruments, including as expressed in the Interpretation Act 1999. The Environment Court in Auckland Cottndl v J Budden and ors19 succinctly summarised those principles, including as expressed in the leading Court of Appeal decisions in Rattn_ry20and Powell.·21 19 20 21 [36] The principles for the interpretation of a subordinate RlvIA planning instrument are also well settled and not contentious. We are guided by the Interpretation A...

6. [2010] NZEmpC 142 Wang v Hamilton Multicultural Services Trust [pdf, 75 KB]

   ...justifiable, confirmed that the matter must be determined according to the test set out in s 103A of the Employment Relations Act 2000 (the Act). The fact that that is now the test for justification led him to a reconsider the decision of the Court of Appeal in New Zealand Fasteners Stainless Ltd v Thwaites,5 a decision decided under the now repealed Employment Contracts Act 1991. He set the position out as follows: [35] For the defendant, Ms Brook accepted that Ms Jinkinson was...

7. Apostolakis v Rennie (Strike-Out Application) 2017 NZHRRT 42 [pdf, 286 KB]

   ...and 105 of the Human Rights Act. Section 105 requires the Tribunal “to act according to the substantial merits of the case, without regard to technicalities”. That section applies, with necessary modifications, to decisions of this Court on appeal against a decision of the Tribunal: s123(5). [46] The Tribunal has an express power to dismiss proceedings, if satisfied that they are frivolous, vexatious or not brought in good faith: s115. As Mr Laurenson points out, the Tribunal del...

8. [2018] NZEmpC 47 New Zealand Nurses Organisation v Waikato District Health Board [pdf, 366 KB]

   ...applied for recall and/or a rehearing of its separate challenge, arguing that it was entitled to a ruling on the matters of interpretation raised. A rehearing was granted by former Chief Judge Colgan in his judgment dated 12 July 2016.6 WDHB appealed that decision to the Court of Appeal but was unsuccessful.7 [14] This rehearing of NZNO’s challenge proceeds on the basis of the evidence heard by Judge Ford and the further submissions from the parties and intervener.8 [15] The c...

9. Booth v Herlihy - Waikoukoutauanui 6B 6C and 6DB [2020] Chief Judges MB 632 (2020 CJ 632) [pdf, 327 KB]

   ...referred me to two decisions of the Māori Appellate Court issued in 1981 where there were attempts 1 [2009] Chief Judge’s MB 209-225 (2009 CJ 209). 2 [2010] Maori Appellate Court MB 167 (2010 APPEAL 167). 2020 Chief Judge’s MB 642 to use s 438 to circumvent the restrictions of s 213.3 In both cases appeals from the Māori Land Court for not constituting such trusts were dismissed. In addition, Ms Batt argued that s 43...

10. Stone v Couch - Rapaki MR875 39A (2020) 65 Te Waipounamu MB 61 (65 TWP 61) [pdf, 345 KB]

    ...entirely consistent with and confirm the class of beneficiaries as set out by the Court and gazetted. Those matters are: (a) Henry has never taken any steps to challenge the Court order or amend the definition of the beneficiaries by way of rehearing, appeal, or s 45 application; (b) Herena’s whānau have buried seven whānau members in the south-west corner of the urupā over the period of more than 40 years without challenge or objection from the trustee; (c) Herena’s wh�...