14343 items matching your search terms
...child. The Ministry of Social Development (MSD) has advised that the DPB rate is equivalent to the widow’s benefit. 1 In applying section 5, we have had regard to the guidelines set out by the Court of Appeal in Ministry of Transport (MOT) v Noort [1993] 3 NZLR 260 Moonen v Film and Literature Board of Review [2000] 2 NZLR 9; and Moonen v Film and Literature Board of Review [2002] 2 NZLR 754 and Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in R v...
...detention and treatment without a final determination of the court should be 14 days. [10] We raised this issue with officials from the Ministry of Health during the drafting of the Bill. 47. Turning to the question of arbitrariness, the Court of Appeal has stated that a detention is arbitrary when it is “capricious, unreasoned, without reasonable cause: if it is made without reference to an adequate determining principle or without following proper procedures.” [11] The length of de...
...to our decisions in similar cases such as Hart5 and Eichelbaum.6 [43] The application for permanent name suppression is declined however, as signalled to Mr Grave, the interim name suppression order will remain in place until the expiry of the appeal period in this matter. Referral to Registrar General of Lands [44] The Standards Committee has asked the Tribunal to make a comment as to whether this matter ought to be referred to the Registrar General, a matter which might impa...
...process will, if it gives proper consideration to the evidence they provide: 9 • Conclude that proofs of debt provided to the High Court and to the company liquidator were incorrect. • Arrive at conclusion that a decision of the Court of Appeal which upheld a statutory demand, should be overturned. • Arrive at a different view to that of the High Court when that Court, in a decision delivered on [Day Month Year], refused leave to Mr and Mrs AB to pursue their matters f...
...helpful guidance on the nature and scope of a LCRO review. She described the review framework in the Act as creating “a very particular statutory process”.1 [16] Her Honour noted that: 2 …the power of review is much broader than an appeal. It gives the Review Officer discretion as to the approach to be taken on any particular review as to the extent of the investigations necessary to conduct that review, and therefore clearly contemplates the Review Officer reaching his o...
...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...
...right-holders, and without compensation. Today, the 2 3 6 8 5 9 Tribunal Report on the foreshore and seabed cont inued on page 3 Crown wishes to restore that situation of effective Crown ownership, which had been challenged by the Court of Appeal. The Tribunal found that there is no over- whelming need for the Crown to do this in the national interest, or to set aside Treaty protections. It considered that, at the very least, the Crown must compensate those who will lose proper...
...number of purposes. The purpose must relate to some matter of business that is pressing at the time. It must also be established that the question of 9 [2011] Māori Appellate Court MB 577 (2011 APPEAL 577) at [40] 10 Ibid at [43] see also Manuirirangi v Nga Hapu o Nga Ruahine Iwi Inc [2010] Chief Judge’s MB 355 (2015 CJ 355) at [33] 57 Tākitimu MB 9 representation for the particular purpose described has not and cannot b...
...New Zealand Inc v Scott EmpC Auckland AC45/08, 8 August 2006 at [11]. 5 Pacific Plastic Recyclers Ltd v Foo [2002] 2 ERNZ 75 (EmpC). 6 At [24]. [25] The rationale for the provision of proper particulars was explained by the Court of Appeal in Price Waterhouse v Fortex Group Ltd in these terms:7 Pleadings which are properly drawn and particularised are, in the case of any complexity, if not in all cases, an essential roadmap for the Court and the parties. They are the doc...
...stability of the proposed retaining structure, and the land and buildings affected by it. In practical terms, one could almost certainly predict that the only evidence that would satisfy a Councilor other RMA decision-maker (eg this Court on an appeal) about those issues would be that of a suitably qualified and experienced geotechnical engineer. The Council's position [14] As a first issue, Ms Mcindoe submits that Declaration 1 (as sought) is not within the scope of s31 O. I...