Search Results

1. [2013] NZEmpC 213 Dr X v a District Health Board [pdf, 73 KB]

   ...the Court lacked jurisdiction, and adjournments and delays associated with changes of counsel. [12] It was reasonable, given the nature of the interests involved, for the applicant to put a concerted effort into the application. As the Court of Appeal observed in Binnie v Pacific Health Ltd, the proposition that costs must not be disproportionate to the monetary value of the successful party’s judgment is too absolute: 3 …both in itself and certainly in a case where justified...

2. ENVC Matiatia party corresp costs Direction Matiatia Ltd 201601 [pdf, 316 KB]

   ...4 ought to have been on notice that this degree of engagement (and its associated costs) would necessarily follow from proceeding by way of direct referral (in contrast to a ‘two-step’ hearing process): any decision was final save for an appeal on a point of law. (c) Contrary to what might be expected with a direct referred application, WML approached its application in an iterative and ill- conceived fashion: (i) It first applied to undertake a reclamation for car parking...

3. ED v VV LCRO 229 / 2010 (15 June 2011) - Costs Decision [pdf, 104 KB]

   ...that type of behaviour were summarised by Sheppard J in Colgate Palmolive Company v Cussons Pty Ltd (1993) 118 ALR 248, which was adopted by Goddard J in Hedley v Kiwi Co-operative Dairies Limited (2002) 16 PRNZ 694 and endorsed by the Court of Appeal in Bradbury v Westpac Banking Corp [2009] 3 NZLR 400. The summary provided by Sheppard J is as follows:- 1. The making of allegations of fraud knowing them to be false and the making of irrelevant allegations of fraud; 2. Partic...

4. AP v Standards Committee X LCRO 317 / 2012 (15 August 2013) [pdf, 67 KB]

   ...reached the necessary threshold of the New Zealand Law Society Disciplinary Tribunal. The outcome sought was that the decision of the Committee be quashed, a determination made as to the facts and law, or deferring the matter until such time as the appeal was heard. These grounds were enlarged in an attached letter and in further correspondence, which altogether contained extensive submissions, particularly concerning the background to the allegations of bias. [12] The main grou...

5. Katene-Griffith - Katene Whanau Trust (2017) 47 Te Waipounamu MB 4 (47 TWP 4) [pdf, 290 KB]

   ...of the land or the interest in the land. [14] The principles applicable to applications under s 241 were recently summarised by the Māori Appellate Court in Larkins v Kaitaia - Waihou Hutoia D2A Block [2013] Māori Appellate Court MB 159 (2013 APPEAL 159). The Court stated that three important considerations emerged from the case-law:6 (a) A change of mind is usually insufficient as a ground for termination unless there is an absence of opposition; (b) Termination should be refu...

6. BORA Vulnerable Children Bill [pdf, 307 KB]

   ...offence, contrary to s 26(2). 7. These questions turn upon whether the prohibitions amount to a criminal penalty. That issue has been canvassed in respect of the provision for Extended Supervision Orders in the Parole Act 2002 both in the Court of Appeal decision in Belcher, above, and in reports under s 7 by successive Attorneys-General.3 As noted both in Belcher and by the Attorney- General, some other jurisdictions have taken a more restrictive view of the scope of penalty, but the p...

7. Mikus - Hoera Te Kooti Whanau Trust (2010) 246 Aotea MB 242 (246 AOT 242) [pdf, 62 KB]

   ...asking if his offending was dishonesty related while noting that if it was he would need to resign as a trustee. Mr Mikus replied on 17 November 2008 stating that his offending was not dishonesty related in any way or form and that he had filed appeals against convictions claiming that he had been “wrongly accused”. [8] On 27 April 2009 in an effort to follow up earlier attempts at contact the Registrar made several additional telephone calls to Shirley Te Kooti but received no r...

8. CAC 405 v Phillips [2016] NZREADT 39 [pdf, 126 KB]

   ...Ms Phillips did not do this – she simply gave up trying to find Ms Harvey and allowed the unauthorised grazing to continue. Is this serious enough to amount to misconduct? [14] The Tribunal have considered the statement set out by the Court of Appeal in New South Wales in Pillai v Messiter (No. 2) [1989] 16 NSWLR 197 where the Court said: “Departures from elementary and generally accepted standards of which … a practitioner could scarcely be heard to say that he or she was ign...

9. CAC 304 v Morris [2016] NZREADT 35 [pdf, 124 KB]

   ...$6,000 to be paid to the Registrar of the Authority at Wellington within one calendar month of this decision, and we also formally censure the defendant. [19] 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 ______________________________ Mr G Denley Member ______________________________ Ms...

10. WA v AD LCRO 132/2012 (18 March 2015) [pdf, 37 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. Discussion 6 At [28]....