Search Results

1. [2018] NZEnvC 003 Auckland Council v London Pacific Family Trust [pdf, 281 KB]

   BEFORE THE ENVIRONMENT COURT I MUA I TE KOOTI TAIAO 0 AOTEAROA IN THE MATTER AND BETWEEN AND Decision No. [2018] NZEnvC 003 of the Resource Management Act 1991 of an appeal pursuant to s 120 of the Act AUCKLAND COUNCIL (ENV-2017-AKL-000105) Appellant JANICE BUDDEN, MARK GITTOS AND MICHAEL ROWE AS TRUSTEES OF THE LONDON PACIFIC FAMILY TRUST Respondent Court: Principal Environment Judge LJ Newhook Environment Judge JJM Hassan Environment Commissioner RM Dunlop Env...

2. WA v XB LCRO 130/2012 (18 March 2015) [pdf, 33 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 [19] The decision records the Committee’s consideration of th...

3. TG v Tangilanu [2012] NZIACDT 17 (8 May 2012) [pdf, 90 KB]

   ...publication, or non-publication of decisions. However, for a professional disciplinary body in contemporary New Zealand to operate without its decisions being available to the public would be a truly exceptional situation. [35] The Court of Appeal in R v Liddell [1995] 1 NZLR 538 at 546 per Cooke P said, in relation to the question of name suppression: “[T]he starting point must always be the importance in a democracy of freedom of speech, open judicial proceedings, and the righ...

4. Fa'asavala v Letalu [2014] NZIACDT 91 (17 September 2014) [pdf, 174 KB]

   ...course where he repeatedly filed unmeritorious requests, then made complaints on the same grounds. The responses of Immigration New Zealand and the Minister made it clear why his actions were inappropriate. He persisted. [2.3] He then lodged an appeal out of time and he did not refund the filing fee to the complainant. [3] The Tribunal found Mr Letalu was incompetent, he did not commence his engagement in accordance with the Code of Conduct 2010 (breaching clause 1.5), he breached the...

5. [2017] NZEmpC 88 Application for access to court documents [pdf, 88 KB]

   ...freely reported as part of the overriding principle of access to justice. Documents produced in court are available for inspection. The High Court Rules recognise that outside of that hearing process, and for a brief period afterwards covering the appeal period, persons other than the parties need permission to inspect documents held on a court file. As referred to in Eden Group Ltd v Jackson, 2 the 2 Eden Group Ltd v Jackson [20...

6. Wall v Fairfax New Zealand Ltd (Costs) [2017] NZHRRT 28 [pdf, 216 KB]

   ...Tribunal. The facts in Haydock v Gilligan Sheppard HC Auckland CIV2007- 404-2929, 11 September 2008 are illustrative. The Tribunal (as then constituted) awarded costs of $12,500 against the unsuccessful plaintiff (Ms Haydock). On her unsuccessful appeal to the High Court she was ordered to pay a further $7,500. She is recorded at [45] of the decision as stating that her financial position was parlous and that she intended declaring herself bankrupt. A case of public importance [10]...

7. [2017] NZEmpC 62 Tradefog Global Co Ltd v Bartholomeusz [pdf, 92 KB]

   ...However, I also do not accept the circumstances of this proceeding justify an award of indemnity costs, meaning full reimbursement to the defendant of the professional fees he has incurred. [23] In Bradbury v Westpac Banking Corp the Court of Appeal referred to non- exclusive categories of circumstances in which indemnity costs have been awarded: 4 (a) the making of allegations of fraud knowing them to be false and the making of irrelevant allegations of fraud; (b) particular m...

8. Te Awe Awe-Bevan - Pt Rangitikei Manawatu Pt B4 being Lot 1 DP 4102 (Old Post Office) Trust, Pt Rangitikei Manawatu B4A Reservation and Rangitikei-Manawatu B4 Part (Rangiotu School) Reservation (2016) 361 Aotea MB 69 (361 AOT 69) [pdf, 254 KB]

   ...249) 3 De Loree v Mokomoko – Hiwarau C (2001) 11 Waiariki Appellate MB 249 (11 AP 249) Barcello–Gemmell – Gore Blks XVII and XIX S90B2 (2004) 6 Te Waipounamu Appellate MB 29 (6 APTW 29) Ripia (2012) 2012 Maori Appellate Court MB 175 (2012 APPEAL 175), Wano v Ngati Hineuru Iwi Inc (2013) 24 Takitimu MB 56 (24 TKT 56), Haig– Waipiro A13 Incorporation (2007) 182 Gisborne MB 7 (182 GIS 7). http://www.westlaw.co.nz/maf/wlnz/app/document?docguid=I352ceeace03511e08eefa443f89988...

9. Wipaki v Apatu - Awarua o Hinemanu Trust (2016) 56 Takitimu MB 54 (56 TKT 54) [pdf, 187 KB]

   ...an advisory trustee, or a custodian trustee. (5) For every trust constituted under this Part the court shall appoint 1 or more responsible trustees, and may appoint 1 or more advisory trustees and 1 or more custodian trustees. [16] The Court of Appeal in Clarke v Karaitiana determined: 4 [51] The touchstone is s 222(2) itself. In appointing a trustee, the Court is obliged to have regard to the ability, experience and knowledge of the individual concerned. In considering those is...

10. [2018] NZEnvC 112 Fright v Christchurch City Council [pdf, 1.7 MB]

    BEFORE THE ENVIRONMENT COURT I MUA I TE KOOTI TAIAO 0 AOTEAROA IN THE MATTER AND BETWEEN AND Decision No. [2018] NZEnvC 112 of the Resource Management Act 1991 of an appeal pursuant to s 120 of the Act CHARMAINE SUSAN FRIGHT (ENV-2017 -CHC-76) Appellant CHRISTCHURCH CITY COUNCIL Respondent Court: Environment Judge J E Borthwick Hearing: In Chambers at Christchurch Date of Decision : 19 July 2018 Date of Issue: 19 July 2018 ERRATUM OF THE ENVIRONMENT COURT A...