Search Results

1. Emmerson - Succession to Beatrice Annie Loper [2020] Chief Judges MB 692 (2020 CJ 692) [pdf, 402 KB]

   ...section the will to which the extension related, if it had become null and void by virtue of this section, was deemed to be revived. In this case, the 16 [2010] Māori Appellate Court MB 167 (2010 APPEAL 167). 17 Māori Affairs Act 1953, ss 110-111; Administration Act 1952; and the Wills Act 1837 (UK). 2020 Chief Judge’s MB 708 Māori Trustee discussed applying for an extension of time with the beneficiaries of the will who...

2. Canterbury Westland Standards Committee v Simes [2012] NZLCDT 4 [pdf, 194 KB]

   ...19 This principle has been discussed and accepted in a number of cases arising in the context of legal fee reviews; D’Allessandro $ D’Angelo v Bouloudas and Another [1992] 10 WAR 191; Sharatt v London Central Bus Co. Ltd and other appeals [2003] 4 All ER 590 20 Ibid, at 218lines 40 - 50 and 219 lines 50 - 53 21 Supra, at 211 lines 11 - 32 22 See Section 241 Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006, read in conjunction with Sections 11 and 14 17 present in the court o...

3. Hall v Auckland Council [2012] NZWHT Auckland 6 [pdf, 228 KB]

   ...Hall and Mr Binnie were prudent purchasers who obtained reports and accepted the recommendation of the report writer to obtain a maintenance report and implement a maintenance schedule. [92] In Coughlan v Abernethy15 White J considered an appeal by the Abernethys against the Tribunal‘s decision to reduce the damages awarded for contributory negligence. The Abernethys purchased their house in 2003 after obtaining a building report which identified a number of defects incl...

4. Auckland Standards Committee 2 v Holland [2022] NZLCDT 9 (3 March 2022) [pdf, 216 KB]

   ...question, let alone the disgrace of losing the privileged status, the underpinnings of which these disciplinary proceedings guard by our findings. Among the cases referred to in LexisNexis Laws of New Zealand, to which he referred, is a 1932 Court of Appeal decision44 which is cited for the proposition that an honest muddler may still be guilty of professional misconduct. In that case, the practitioner mixed his own funds with trust funds. In the present case, we could not charac...

5. [2019] NZREADT 49 - CAC 521 v Wright (13 November 2019) [pdf, 287 KB]

   ...49 - Wright decision. The Tribunal will then issue a separate decision as to the costs application, in due course. [94] Pursuant to s 113 of the Act, the Tribunal draws the parties’ attention to s 116 of the Act, which sets out the right of appeal to the High Court. The procedure to be followed is set out in part 20 of the High Court Rules. __________________ Hon P J Andrews Chairperson __________________ Mr J Doogue Member _...

6. Gamble - Hopa Heremaia Trust [2021] Chief Judges MB 18 (2021 CJ 18) [pdf, 353 KB]

   ...and Waru Reihana are the children of Pirihira, a daughter of Hopa Heremaia. [10] She claims that Pitawai and Waru Reihana are not children of Pirihira. Her view is that Pirihira died without issue. 3 [2010] Maori Appellate Court MB 167 (2010 APPEAL 167). 2021 Chief Judge’s MB 37 [11] She wants these shares from Hopa Heremaia transferred to the Hopa Heremaia Trust. [12] At the hearing the applicant’s position was supported by Alec Hopa Heremaia as the chairman of th...

7. [2011] NZEmpC 125 Angus v Ports of Auckland Limited [pdf, 160 KB]

   ...non-exhaustive because of 4 See, for example, New Zealand Educational Institute v Board of Trustees of Auckland Normal Intermediate School [1992] 3 ERNZ 243 (Labour Court) affirmed by the Court of Appeal in New Zealand Educational Institute v The Board of Trustees of Auckland Normal Intermediate School [1994] 2 ERNZ 414; Lewis v Howick College Board of Trustees [2010] NZEmpC 4, [2010] ERNZ 1; Jinkinson v Oceana Gold (NZ) Ltd [2010]...

8. [2013] NZEmpC 28 Maori Hill & Balmacewen Pharmacy Ltd v O’Sullivan [pdf, 205 KB]

   ...not satisfied that she was dismissed by Mr Vohora on 3 May or at a later date. I do however consider that Ms O’Sullivan was unjustifiably constructively dismissed. [44] In Auckland Shop Employees Union v Woolworths (NZ) Ltd, 4 the Court of Appeal identified the following categories of constructive dismissal: (a) The employer gives the employee a choice between resigning or being dismissed; (b) The employer embarks on a course of conduct with the deliberate and dominant pur...

9. [2017] NZEmpC 132 Waikato District Health Board v Archibald [pdf, 457 KB]

   ...“embarrassed”; $6,000 in relation to unjustified action in H v A Ltd [2016] NZEmpC 54 at [153] (little evidence produced in support of the s 123(1)(c)(i) claim, at [150]). In Carter Holt Harvey Ltd v Pirie [1997] ERNZ 648 (CA) at 652, the Court of Appeal described the award of $50,000 in Ogilvy & Mather (New Zealand) Ltd v Turner [1994] 1 NZLR 641 (CA) as the “high water mark” for cases of its kind. It was followed ten years later in the Employment Court by an award of $...

10. Wakelin and Anor as Trustees for the Get In & Walk Trust v Taupo Texture Coatings Limited [2011] NZWHT Auckland 43 [pdf, 206 KB]

    ...suffered considerable stress and anxiety as a result of the leaks to the deck and the ongoing problems and tensions associated with trying to seek a solution. [107] Ellis J in Lee Findlay v Auckland City Council6 concluded that the Court of Appeal decision Byron Avenue7 confirms that the guidelines for awarding general damages in leaky building cases are $25,000 per dwelling for owner-occupiers. 6 Lee Findlay v Auc...