Search Results

1. August 2018 outstanding applicatrions [pdf, 388 KB]

   ...05/12/13 - Application to the Chief Judge A20180004454 58/93 Ngati Kawa Aramiha Taituha Te Tii A Maori Reservation (Waitangi Marae) - and an inquiry into administration of a rservation made at 173 Taitokerau MB 245 on 29 May 2018 - Appeal A20180004493 45/93 Ripeka Brightwell Roera Rangi or Rangi Roera or Roera Te Heke-tanga - and succession orders made at 10 Taranaki MB 174 (13/06/1904), 10 Taranaki MB 138 (12/10/1906) and Wellington Appellate MB no 1 p.133 (1...

2. LCRO 05/2018 ZZ v XX and WW Lawyers (26 September 2018) [pdf, 232 KB]

   ...scope of review [34] The nature and scope of a review have been discussed by the High Court, which said of the process of review under the Act:2 … the power of review conferred upon Review Officers is not appropriately equated with a general appeal. The obligations and powers of the Review Officer as described in the Act create a very particular statutory process. The Review Officer has broad powers to conduct his or her own investigations including the power to exercise for that...

3. LCRO 140/2020 AB v RP (27 November 2020) [pdf, 267 KB]

   ...scope of review [38] The nature and scope of a review have been discussed by the High Court, which said of the process of review under the Act:9 … the power of review conferred upon Review Officers is not appropriately equated with a general appeal. The obligations and powers of the Review Officer as described in the Act create a very particular statutory process. The Review Officer has broad powers to conduct his or her own investigations including the power to exercise for that...

4. Te Amo v Nicholas - Te Whaiti Nui A Toi Block (2020) 233 Waiariki MB 92 (233 WAR 93) [pdf, 387 KB]

   ...couple would have put their money and efforts into obtaining a first home elsewhere without cloudy title. It is a clear enough case of improvement through encouragement and in the expectation of interest… The Court also referred to the Court of Appeal decision in Lankow v Rose, which identified the following four features, which if established would show it would be unconscionable to deny the claimant an interest:16 (a) Contributions, direct or indirect, to the property in ques...

5. [2019] NZEmpC 190 Maddigan v Director-General of Conservation [pdf, 304 KB]

   ...Department’s policy. [13] A further email was sent to Mr Roberts on 1 November 2016, advising that Mr Maddigan was obtaining more information from the Police, that the 31 October 2016 Court date had been changed to 21 November 2016, and that the appeal would be heard within the next two weeks. Clearly what was being sought on Mr Maddigan’s behalf was deferral of the disciplinary process until issues with his licence had been resolved by the Courts. [14] In the meantime, Mr...

6. LCRO 24/2017 HC v DASH (24 January 2020) [pdf, 216 KB]

   ...scope of review [29] The nature and scope of a review have been discussed by the High Court, which said of the process of review under the Act:1 … the power of review conferred upon Review Officers is not appropriately equated with a general appeal. The obligations and powers of the Review Officer as described in the Act create a very particular statutory process. The Review Officer has broad powers to conduct his or her own investigations including the power to exercise for that...

7. Rata - Whataarakai No 1 Roadway and Lot 1 Deposited Plan 374627 [2020] Chief Judge's MB 74 (2020 CJ 74) [pdf, 432 KB]

   ...12. Anecdotally, it is understood that Mr Setter may be retiring from farming operations and his stated reasons for the orders sought may no longer be applicable. 13. The applicants did not become aware of these orders until after both the appeal and rehearing periods had elapsed and now seek the intervention of the Chief Judge so that all relevant facts regarding access and Whataarakai Roadline can be made known. 14. All of the above is respectfully submitted. b) Impact...

8. Te Manutukutuku Issue 30 [pdf, 8.9 MB]

   ...decision said that Maori were "significantly disadvantaged" by the way the Maori Option exercise was carried out. But, because the Govenlment handling of the option was not "substantially unfair", the Court did not uphold an appeal by the Maori Congress, Maori Women's Welfare League and others that the exercise was unlawful. The court did say, though, that the Crown should feel "some concern" at what had occurred, and that an "extensive ef­...

9. LCRO 178/2021 AA v EL (26 November 2021) [pdf, 256 KB]

   ...scope of review [39] The nature and scope of a review have been discussed by the High Court, which said of the process of review under the Act:1 … the power of review conferred upon Review Officers is not appropriately equated with a general appeal. The obligations and powers of the Review Officer as described in the Act create a very particular statutory process. The Review Officer has broad powers to conduct his or her own investigations including the power to exercise for that...

10. [2021] NZEmpC 138 The 20 District Health Boards v New Zealand Nurses Organisation [pdf, 378 KB]

    ...of good faith under s 4 of the Act, via s 100D(4). [92] My earlier discussion resolves this issue. A refusal to comply with an LPS agreement may fall for assessment under s 4, not via s 100D(4) but by s 100D(2). [93] Further, as the Court of Appeal noted in New Zealand Professional Firefighters Union v New Zealand Fire Service Commission, a breach of a relevant agreement may not necessarily amount to a breach of good faith, for example, if there has been a genuine misinterpretati...