Search Results

1. HR v OW and CT LCRO 79/2014 (18 May 2015) [pdf, 95 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. Review Hearing [35] Both parties attended a review hearing in [City] on 2...

2. [2021] NZIACDT 18 - CL v Khetarpal (10 August 2021) [pdf, 242 KB]

   ...complainant, a national of India, was in New Zealand on a visitor visa, with her husband and daughter. [5] Ms Khetarpal, a licensed immigration adviser, was a director of Ivisas Ltd, of Auckland. Her licence had been cancelled on 16 February 2016. On appeal to the District Court, it issued an interim order on 22 March 2016 allowing her to practice subject to supervision, including a condition that she inform her clients that she was providing advice pursuant to an interim order....

3. Part 1 Application legal aid lawyer [pdf, 1.2 MB]

   ...Approval Level 1 Criminal Provider Approval Level 2 Criminal Provider Approval Level 3 Criminal Provider Approval Level 4 Family Mental Health Māori Land Court and Māori Appellate Court Waitangi Tribunal Refugee and Protected Persons Court of Appeal and Supreme Court Employment Advocate I’m applying for approval in the following specified legal services: Duty Lawyer   Police Detention Legal Assistance (PDLA)   Family Legal Advice Service (FLAS) I’m applying for appr...

4. Tamou v Smith - Sections 57, 58, 70, 72 and 100 of the Ratana Pa (2016) 361 Aotea MB 75 (361 AOT 75) [pdf, 297 KB]

   ...(1996) 11 Taitokerau Appellate MB 143 (11 ACTK 143) 17 (1996) 19 Waikato Maniapoto Appellate MB 40 (19 APWM 40) 18 [2001] 1 NZLR 87 19 (2006) 34 Gisborne Appellate Court MB 168 (34 APGS 168) at 172 361 Aotea MB 84 [38] The Court of Appeal in The Trustees of Pukeroa Oruawhata v Mitchell stressed the importance of strict adherence to s 244 of the Act whenever variations to trust orders are contemplated. 20 A three step process was necessary: first, notice to the benefici...

5. New Zealand Transport Agency - Kaiti 336F (Roadway) (2020) 92 Tairawhiti MB 287 (92 TRW 287) [pdf, 486 KB]

   ...41A and to the ownership interest held in the Parekura Hei Road. That means those who acquired title from him within the Livesey subdivision became owners in common with the Māori owners of the road. [42] The Māori Appellate Court dismissed an appeal against this decision in 2004.22 Members of the hapū Te Whānau a Ehutu wanted to restrict ownership of the roadway to the original owners at the time of the partition, and advanced various arguments in support. The Court agreed wit...

6. 2021-04-13 Heller 1 - ORC - Brief of Evidence of T B Heller dated 13 May 2020 [pdf, 404 KB]

   SRP-098608-67-197-V3 BEFORE THE ENVIRONMENT COURT CHRISTCHURCH REGISTRY ENV-2019-CHC-132 IN THE MATTER of an appeal pursuant to section 120 of the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) BETWEEN CLUTHA DISTRICT COUNCIL Appellant AND OTAGO REGIONAL COUNCIL Respondent BRIEF OF EVIDENCE OF THOMAS BRENDAN HELLER 13 MAY 2020 ________________________________________________________ GALLAWAY COOK ALLAN LAWYERS DUNEDIN...

7. CAC20006 v Stevenson [2013] NZREADT 56 [pdf, 76 KB]

   ...Committee within 21 days of the date of this order. • Any reply by Mr Stevenson 21 days thereafter. • Any reply by the Complaints Assessment within a further 5 days of this order. [50] The Tribunal draws the parties’ attentions to the appeal provisions contained in s 116 of the Act. ______________________________ Ms K Davenport QC Chairperson ______________________________ Mr G Denley Member ______________________________ Ms N Dangen Member...

8. [2024] NZEmpC 105 Watkins v Highmark Homes Ltd Interlocutory Judgment [pdf, 281 KB]

   ...the claim, the Court could consider ordering a lower sum than that applied for. That concession indicates to me that Highmark Homes is not using this application to stifle Ms Watkins’ claim. [37] In McLachlan v MEL Network Ltd, the Court of Appeal stated: “defendants … must be protected against being drawn into unjustified litigation, particularly where it is over-complicated and unnecessarily protracted.”23 Counsel for Highmark Homes submitted that the description fits t...

9. FH v GJ LCRO 87/2014 (7 Aug 2015) [pdf, 77 KB]

   ...Ms FH’s unsatisfactory conduct warranted a rebuke from the Committee. It is immaterial whether this rebuke took the form of a reprimand or a censure. The meaning of the terms “reprimand” and “censure” were considered by the Court of Appeal in The New Zealand Law Society v B. [39] The Court decided that the two terms are synonymous:13 This is apparent from a range of definitions of the two words, including those in Black’s Law Dictionary, the Oxford English Dictionary, t...

10. AVL operating guidelines for senior courts [pdf, 684 KB]

    ...Authority to Use  AVL may be used under statutory authority or inherent powers where no statutory authority exists.  Section 103 of the Evidence Act 2006 allows for applications to be made to the court (the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeal, the High Court, any District Court, Family Court or Youth Court) for witnesses to give evidence in an alternative way. Alternative ways are outlined in section 105. Those which could be facilitated by AVL include a witness giving evide...