Search Results

1. LAT - Practice note - 2011 [pdf, 176 KB]

   ...document, it will do so by notice in writing. [5.5] Any person who has provided original documents to the Tribunal may request their return. Such requests will be considered after the Tribunal’s decision is delivered and the time limited for appeal or judicial review has expired. [5.6] The Tribunal will provide a copy of the application for review, the submissions and all supporting materials to the Commissioner (s 54(c)). The Commissioner is to file submissions and relevant d...

2. AAR and AAS v ZZI Ltd [2010] NZDT 14 (21 July 2010) [pdf, 91 KB]

   ...[13] A mutual mistake exists where there has been a different erroneous belief about some matter related to the contract (that is, where neither party has correctly appreciated the position). In a case very similar to this one, an early Court of Appeal decision took the view that where a purchaser and a vendor were mistaken as to the amount of land being sold that it could be said that one party was mistaken as to the amount of land being sold, whilst the other party was mistaken as...

3. Holden - Hiraani Te Hei (2011) 271 Aotea MB 106 (271 AOT 106) [pdf, 72 KB]

   ...in relation to the adoption of the children were bona fide and that the adoption should be recognised. Kathleen Blake and Ralph Wellwood were held to be entitled to succeed to Hiraani Te Hei according to Māori custom. [13] On 18 May 1906 an appeal was heard by the Native Appellate Court against the decision referred to above. The issues for the Appellate Court were firstly, whether the children were adopted and secondly, what effect must be given to the registration of an adopti...

4. Auckland Standards Committee v Castles [2014] NZLCDT 8 [pdf, 77 KB]

   ...relation to dishonesty on the part of the practitioner by misleading the Standards Committee on two occasions and the finding that he had represented non-chargeable time to 1 [1994] 2 All ER 486 (Court of Appeal), at 492. 5 appear as a discount to his clients in a manner which we found to be “utterly misleading”.2 [13] Mr Katz reminded us of the vulnerability of these clients, a matter which was in Hart3 considered an aggr...

5. Standards Committee 1 v Hart [2011] NZLCDT 5 [pdf, 84 KB]

   ...route, we agree with the Society’s submission that a presumption of “openness” is implicit and in the absence of a body of case law specifically relating to s 240 and s 238, we adopt the principles expressed in R v Liddell4 by the Court of Appeal relating to s 140 of the Criminal Justice Act 1985, as principles that best support the purposes of the Act: “In considering whether the powers given by s 140 should be exercised, the starting point must always be the importance in a d...

6. 1982 Official Information Act charging guidelines [pdf, 28 KB]

   ...1982 provides that the Ombudsman may investigate and review any decision on the charge to be paid in respect of a request for access to official information. When informing applicants of charges to be paid, organisations should point out this right of appeal to the Ombudsman. 10.2 A record should be kept of all costs incurred. Wherever a liability to pay is incurred the applicant should be notified of the method of calculating the charge and this fact noted on the record. 11. OMBUDSMAN INVEST...

7. CAC 20005 v Morton-Jones [2014] NZREADT 100 [pdf, 29 KB]

   ...against the defendant in order to ameliorate the effect of the interim suspension of licence should the defendant succeed in the prosecution. 5 [21] 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 ______________________________ Mr J...

8. CAC402 v Zhang [2016] NZREADT 25 [pdf, 124 KB]

   ...and the fine. 5 [14] We impose the following penalty upon Mr Zhang: (a) We censure Mr Zhang. (b) We fine him the sum of $2,000 to be paid to the Real Estate Agents Authority. [15] The Tribunal draws to the parties’ attention the appeal provisions of s 116 of the Real Estate Agents Act 2008. ______________________________ Ms K Davenport QC Chairperson ______________________________ Mr J Gaukrodger Member ______________________________ Ms...

9. [2014] NZEmpC 42 Nisha v LSG Sky Chefs New Zealand Ltd [pdf, 70 KB]

   ...of the statute by courts can be said to be at a developmental stage. The plaintiff says the particular issues arising in this case are unique, despite other litigation between associated parties in this Court, the High Court, and the Court of Appeal, so that it is important to the development of the law generally that the case is able to proceed. Further, the plaintiff says that in an area of law on one side of which there are “vulnerable employees”, it is important to allow s...

10. [2015] NZEmpC 106 Nisha v LSG Sky Chefs New Zealand Ltd [pdf, 94 KB]

    ...interlocutory applications that were brought as of right and determined. If the plaintiff is correct, any litigation privilege in those documents has now expired by reason of the disposal of the associated litigation in the High Court and Court of Appeal by a judgment late last year of the Supreme Court. 4 That is a matter that the plaintiff is entitled to have determined. I will give directions at the end of this judgment about how that issue is to be determined....