Search Results

1. LCRO 74/2020 NS v AD (29 January 2021) [pdf, 285 KB]

   ...scope of a review have been discussed by the High Court, which said of the process of review under Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 (the Act):11 … 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 tha...

2. Brooking v Henderson - Wharekahika A47 (2022) 110 Tairawhiti MB 238 (110 TRW 238) [pdf, 497 KB]

   ...dense and prolific. As His Honour Judge Stone has noted in relation to the previous s 240:11 [8] There are several superior court authorities regarding the principles applicable to the serious step of removal of trustees. They include the Court of Appeal judgments Rameka v Hall and Naera v Fenwick, and the Māori Appellate Court decision of Perenara v Pryor. [9] These authorities support the following general propositions: (a) removal is a serious step and is not undertaken l...

3. Wall v Karaitiana - Tauhara Middle 15 Trust (2007) 85 Taupo MB 225 (85 TPO 225) [pdf, 370 KB]

   ...illusion that they will be held to account should it ultimately transpire that the proposal should not have proceeded. They need to consult their advisers as to the nature and extent of their potential liability in this context. [21] The Court of Appeal confirmed the broad powers of the Maori Land Court in respect of trusts in the important judgment The Proprietors of Mangakino Township v The Maori Land Court & Anor (CA65/99, 16 June 1999, Wellington). In that decision it was note...

4. Halesowen v Kelso LCRO 175-176 / 2009 (18 November 2009) [pdf, 91 KB]

   ...dispute relating to the appointment of trustees are now before the Mäori Appellate Court. However, this does not affect the conduct of this matter before the Standards Committee. The comments of the judge in relation to Ms Halesowen are not under appeal (and are now well over a year old). Those comments were supported by concerns raised by Mr XX. It was entirely appropriate for the Committee to act on the basis of those comments in commencing an inquiry. [25] It was also suggested...

5. Kawiti v Kawiti - Motatau 2 Section 65A (2017) 162 Taitokerau MB 269 (162 TTK 269) [pdf, 235 KB]

   ...and 91 Land Trust (2005) 15 Whanganui Appellate Court MB 192 (15 WGAP 192). 16 151 Taitokerau MB 219-251 (151 TTK 219-251) at 248. 17 See Taueki v Horowhenua Sailing Club – Horowhenua 11 (Lake) Block [2014] Maori Appellate Court MB 60 (2014 APPEAL 60). 162 Taitokerau MB 279 [40] Wynyard has shown blatant disregard for the authority of the other trustees. He has treated them with contempt and has expressed strong beliefs that he is the true and rightful owner of this l...

6. Russia Sanctions Bill [pdf, 180 KB]

   ...subpart of the Bill of Rights Act entitled “life and security of the person”, and the other sections in that subpart all deal with interferences with bodily integrity.8 While it has not received detailed judicial consideration, the Court of Appeal in Lyall v Solicitor-General appears to have proceeded on the assumption that s 9 was applicable to property for forfeiture.9 On this basis, s 9 could arguably apply to financial penalties. 45. In the event that a fine can fall within...

7. Zhang v The First Org Ltd (Strike Out) [2024] NZHRRT 11 [pdf, 163 KB]

   ...condition, or requirement shall be unlawful under that provision unless the person whose conduct or practice is in issue, or who imposes the condition or requirement, establishes good reason for it. [18] That section has been described by the Court of Appeal decision in Ngaronoa v Attorney-General in the following terms: 9 [119] Indirect discrimination under s 65 of the Human Rights Act can arise when a criterion in a law or policy, which is not on its face discriminatory, correspon...

8. Wawatai(Tate) - Estate of Te Raana Waiti (2014) 88 Taitokerau MB 233 (88 TTK 233) [pdf, 110 KB]

   ...variety of estoppel is res judicata. This results from the rule which prevents the parties to a judicial determination from litigating the same question over again, even though the determination is demonstrably wrong. Except in proceedings by way of appeal, the parties bound by the judgment are estopped from questioning it. As between one another, they may neither pursue the same cause of action again, nor may they again litigate any issue which was an essential element in the decis...

9. [2024] NZEnvC 227 Te Mana Moana o Ngati Irapuaia Trust v Bay of Plenty Regional Council [pdf, 1.8 MB]

   Te Mana Moana o Ngāti Irapuaia Trust v Bay of Plenty Regional Council IN THE ENVIRONMENT COURT AT AUCKLAND I TE KŌTI TAIAO O AOTEAROA KI TĀMAKI MAKAURAU Decision [2024] NZEnvC 227 IN THE MATTER OF an appeal under section 120 the Resource Management Act 1991 BETWEEN TE MANA MOANA O NGĀTI IRAPUAIA TRUST (ENV-2023-AKL-000079) Appellant AND BAY OF PLENTY REGIONAL COUNCIL Respondent AND ŌPŌTIKI MARINA AND INDUSTRIAL PARK LIMITED Applicant AND NGĀI TAMAHAUA NGĀ...

10. Wild v Ministry for Primary Industries (Strike Out) [2024] NZHRRT 12 [pdf, 239 KB]

    ...dealt with in accordance with s 98 of the Privacy Act 2020. Section 98 is not a mere technicality. It limits the Tribunal’s jurisdiction to matters that have been dealt with by the Privacy Commissioner in the manner it prescribes. As the Court of Appeal confirmed in Guo v Culpan, s 105 does not allow the scope of proceedings in the Tribunal to be expanded beyond their proper limits.9 [16] Nor does the Tribunal have jurisdiction to review whether the Privacy Commissioner’s inves...