14627 items matching your search terms
...2 Above n 1. 3 Dorbu v the Lawyers and Conveyancers Disciplinary Tribunal HC Auckland CIV-2009-404- 7381, 11 May 2011 at [17]. 4 At [20]. 5 [18] Those comments were noted with approval by the Court of Appeal in Deliu v National Standards Committee of the New Zealand Law Society where the Court said:5 It is of course well-established that the Tribunal is not entitled to determine that facts in issue are proved by accepting without inquiry the
...had been moved on to the land, there was no suggestion that the house does not remain fixed to the land. So, I will 17 Rudolph v Reti – Otetao B3A2 [2011] Māori Appellate Court MB 143 (2011 APPEAL 143) 18 See Sione – Te Hapua 24 (2000) 4 Taitokerau Appellate MB 275 (4 APWH 275); Bidois – Te Puna 154D 3B 2B (2008) 12 Waiariki Appellate MB 102 (12 AP 102); and Brown v Māori Appellate Court [2001] 1 NZLR 87 64 Tākitimu MB...
...recently summarised in Mikaere v Smallman – Mangatawa No 8A, where the Court stated:14 [16] 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 Maori Appellate Court decision of Perenara v Pryor. [17] These authorities support the following general propositions: (a) removal is a serious step and is not undertaken lightl...
...powers under section 244; or (c) terminate the trust if the court is satisfied that there is a sufficient degree of support for termination among the beneficiaries. [21] In Proprietors of Mangakino Township v Māori Land Court, the Court of Appeal noted that s 231 calls for a general review of the trust’s governance and management of its assets on behalf of the beneficial owners, and went on to consider the scope of such review. 9 [21] In carrying out a general review of t...
...empha.sised that trustees in such circumstances have the option of seeking directions from the Court and when they fail to do so they must be excused for that omission if relief is to be granted ." [11] In Wong v Burt [2005] NZLR 91 the Comi of Appeal emphasised that under section 73 the Comi must be satisfied that the trustees acted "honestly and reasonably", and that this expression is conjunctive. [12] In weighing up whether to relieve the trustees of liability I tak...
...made provision for shift workers to work up to 175 additional hours per year, so just over 14 additional shifts). In this sense the present case is analogous to New Zealand Airline Pilots’ Assoc Inc v Mt Cook Airlines Ltd where the Court of Appeal upheld the Employment Court’s finding that relevant daily pay in relation to pilots who were paid a salary and rostered to work up to a maximum of 206 hours per year (based on a varying fortnightly roster) could be assessed on the bas...
...from the court to prepare and file the statement of defence. Nature and scope of review [39] The nature and scope of a review has been discussed by the Court. In Deliu v Hong,18 the Court said: … 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...
...to avoid the consequences of scheduling the work for, or carrying it out, on Monday, 27 October 2014. Discussion [19] In New Zealand Fire Service Commission v New Zealand Professional Firefighters Union, the majority of the Court of Appeal held: 5 Whether a day would otherwise be a working day is an intensely practical question. In the first instance, employers and employees have to try to agree on the answer; s 12(2). And the factors they are bound to take into acc...
...interpretation to include, for purposes other than fulfilment of testamentary or settlor intention in testamentary dispositions or settlements, children in utero as “living” or “surviving”. [18] I note that neither the Supreme Court nor the Court of Appeal decision in the same case, appeared to contest that the en ventre sa mere principle would apply in New Zealand in the case of testamentary dispositions (although such comments were obiter). The Courts merely opposed the ex...
...I do not propose to repeat those principles again in this judgment. 3 2019 Chief Judge’s MB 420-445 4 [2009] Chief Judge’s MB 209-225 (2009 CJ 209) 5 [2010] Maori Appellate Court MB 167 (2010 APPEAL 167) 2019 Chief Judge’s MB 992 Issues [15] The issues to determine in this case are: (a) Whether Mr Phillip Phillips had the competency to sign the Deed of Family Arrangement (between November 2008 and February 2009) given hi...