13394 items matching your search terms
...judgment [8] The Land [10] The Trust [12] The Leases [13] Background [15] The present proceedings [21] Directions [24] The hearings [26] Post hearing events [30] The Appeal [32] Applications for Special Aid [34] The Law [35] Applicants’ case [40] Respondents’ case [47] Discussion [53] Payment of rent and related charges [58] Rental...
Notice of appeal by Waste Management NZ Limited against decisions on the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan Dated: 16 September 2016 REFERENCE: Paula Brosnahan (paula.brosnahan@chapmantripp.com) Jill Gregory (jill.gregory@chapmantripp.com) In the Environment Court of New Zealand at Auckland ENV-2016-AKL- in the matter of: the Local Government (Auckland Transitional Provisions) Act 2010 (LGATPA) and the Resource Management Act 1991 and:...
...afford to retain the property and suffering a loss of over $292,000.00 in unrecoverable legal costs, as well as serious health issues from the associated stress and anxiety. [24] The claims were opposed at all stages and were then unsuccessfully appealed to the Court of Appeal. Finally, leave was sought to appeal to the Supreme Court. This was dismissed summarily. The court stated, after describing the pattern of events: “[77] The conclusion reached by Priestley J was the only...
...thereby raised. [16] Next, it is appropriate to refer to the relevant principles which apply to the hearing of a non de novo challenge since these differ from those relating to a de novo challenge: a) A non de novo hearing is in the nature of an appeal. The challenger or plaintiff is required to show that the Authority’s determination was wrong. 6 b) Thus, the challenger has an onus of persuading the Court of the existence of an error of fact and/or law by the Authority in...
...is inconsistent with what is expressly recorded in the collective agreement. [69] In the field of employment law, the interpretation of collective agreements has been addressed most authoritatively and recently in the judgment of the Court of Appeal in Silver Fern Farms Ltd v New Zealand Meatworkers and Related Trades Union Inc. 6 The Court of Appeal followed the judgments of the Supreme Court in Vector Gas and what it described as a series of important decisions of the House of...
...parties involved, but future plan users. [29] Although these are declaratory proceedings, we find principles that have been applied in other RMA contexts of some relevance here. Costs are not usually awarded against Councils in the context of s120 appeals unless it can be shown that they have neglected a duty. 30 It is even more unlikely that costs will be awarded against Councils in plan appeals and it has been held that a relatively high threshold has to be reached before an award...
...possibility, making the point that the two challenges raised discrete procedural issues, which needed to be heard separately. [51] I agree with Mr Towner. The position is not unlike that which arose in Skinner v Stayinfront Inc.11 There, the Court of Appeal stated that it was logical and sensible to determine a preliminary issue ahead of a merits hearing, in the particular circumstances of that proceeding. [52] For the purposes of this case, I remain of the view, as was agreed wit...
...[30]–[32]. [18] Striking out is often the appropriate course where the statement of claim is prolix and unintelligible. See Commissioner of Inland Revenue v Chesterfields Preschools Ltd [2013] NZCA 53, [2013] 2 NZLR 679. At [84] the Court of Appeal set out the requirements of a statement of claim (High Court Rules 2016, rr 5.17, 5.26 and 5.27). Those requirements apply equally in proceedings before the Tribunal. Specifically: [18.1] The pleading must be accurate, clear and intelli...
...that they were unaware that they were able to join other parties to this claim. (b) The claimants say that the joinder application to join their lawyers was further complicated by subsequent removal applications from two respondents and an appeal they launched against the removal of one of those respondents. They say that they had to attend to “three continuous proceedings of two second removal applications and an appeal to the High Court between May 2021 and April 2023...
...Te Hiwi Piahana Whānau Trust v Ngāti Tukorehe Tribal Committee and Tahamata Incorporation (2014) 319 Aotea MB 238 (319 AOT 238) at [11]-[13]. 2 Taueki v Horowhenua 11 (Lake) Māori Reservation Trust [2019] Māori Appellate Court MB 652 (2019 APPEAL 652). 3 Karepa v Te Riini – The Kikorangi and Kareti Whānau Trust (2016) 144 Waiariki MB 3 (144 WAR 3), citing Samuels v Matauri X Incorporation – Matauri X Incorporation (2009) 7 Taitokerau Court MB 206 (7 APWH 216). 4 See, for e...