Search Results

1. LS v MIS [2021] CEIT-2020-0024 [pdf, 365 KB]

   ...https://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2019/0021/latest/whole.html#LMS35785 funding, without which cases with merit could never be pursued. Litigation funding is champertous, as the funder has no interest in the litigation, beyond profit. This development led the Court of Appeal in Saunders v Houghton to state10: We have concluded that, like the common law of Australia and that of Canada, the common law of New Zealand should refrain from condemning as tortious or otherwise un...

2. LA - Provider manual - Part 1 [pdf, 523 KB]

   ...lawyer Clause 7 Police Detention Legal Assistance Clause 8 Civil Clause 9 Family Clause 10 Māori Land/Māori Appellate Courts Clause 11 Waitangi Tribunal Clause 12 Mental Health Clause 13 Refugees and Protected Persons Clause 14 Court of Appeal and Supreme Court In this chapter This chapter contains the following sections: Section See Page Application requirements 19 Approval types 20 Criteria for approval – all applicants 21 Specific criteria for approval –...

3. CAC302 v Mairs [2016] NZREADT 15 [pdf, 135 KB]

   ...appellants is compensation for straight market loss. This kind of monetary award was discussed in the decision of Quin v The Real Estate Agents Authority [2012] NZHC 3557 where the High Court (per Brewer J) held that committees (or the Tribunal on appeal) cannot order licensees to pay complainants money as compensation for errors or omission (compensatory damages) under s 93(1)(f) of the Act. Licensees can only be ordered to do something or take actions to rectify or “put right” an...

4. MacNaughtan v Accident Compensation Corporation (Treatment Injury/Causation) [2023] NZACC 160 [pdf, 327 KB]

   IN THE DISTRICT COURT AT WELLINGTON I TE KŌTI-Ā-ROHE KI TE WHANGANUI-A-TARA [2023] NZACC 160 ACR 277/18 UNDER THE ACCIDENT COMPENSATION ACT 2001 IN THE MATTER OF AN APPEAL UNDER SECTION 149 OF THE ACT BETWEEN JOHN MACNAUGHTAN Appellant AND ACCIDENT COMPENSATION CORPORATION Respondent Hearing: 25 August 2023 Heard at: Wellington Appearances: Mr R Mansfield KC for the Appellant Mr L Hawes-Gandar and Ms F Becroft for the Respondent Judgment: 3 Octo...

5. Kapohe Family Trust v Cleland [2012] NZWHT Auckland 28 [pdf, 87 KB]

   ...CIV-2009-404-1880, 19 November 2009. that scale when calculating quantum.9 In this case I consider that the High Court scale is more appropriate as the amount claimed exceeds $800,000. [29] In Bradbury v Westpac Banking Corporation10 the Court of Appeal identified three approaches to costs: a) The standard scale applies by default where cause is not shown to depart from it; b) Increased costs may be ordered where there is a failure by the paying party to act reasonabl...

6. Amendment to Grant Forms and High Cost Criminal Cases - Submissions and decisions [pdf, 715 KB]

   ...request Please provide justification for any junior or co-counsel sought, specifying their identity, proposed role and level of involvement. What is the next scheduled court event and when will it occur? What is your estimate of trial/ appeal length in hearing days? What date has the matter been set down for trial/appeal? Initial grant High Cost Case Management Only Please explain how the 40 hours initial grant has been used. 4 Status of case Has th...

7. Smith - Pekapeka 2A1D2B (2023) 103 Tākitimu MB 287 (103 TKT 287) [pdf, 231 KB]

   ...97) at [30]. 7 Reid v Trustees of Kaiwaitau 1 Trust – Kaiwaitau 1 (2006) 34 Gisborne Appellate MB 168 (34 APGS 168) at [17]. 8 See, for example, Whaanga v Trustees of the Anewa Trust – Anewa Block [2013] Māori Appellate Court MB 45 (2013 APPEAL 45); upheld by Whaanga v Niania – Anewa Trust [2011] Māori Appellate Court MB 428 (2011 APPEAL 428); 103 Tākitimu MB 293 to be able to be established on the block unless a portion of it is partitioned. This will give the...

8. Minister of Māori Development - Otaramuturangi or Otara o Mutu Rangi (Burial Ground) (2017) 163 Waiariki MB 246 (163 WAR 246) [pdf, 304 KB]

   ...knowledge of the individual or body; and (b) Shall not appoint an individual or body unless it is satisfied that the appointment of that individual or body would be broadly acceptable to the beneficiaries. [21] In Clarke v Karaitiana the Court of Appeal confirmed the importance of s222: [51] The touchstone is s 222(2) itself. In appointing a trustee, the Court is obliged to have regard to the ability, experience and knowledge of the individual concerned. In considering those is...

9. [2019] NZEnvC 089 Schwartfeger v Northland Regional Council [pdf, 5 MB]

   BEFORE THE ENVIRONMENT COURT I MUA I TE KOOTI TAIAO O AOTEAROA IN THE MATTER AND BETWEEN AND Decision No. [2019] NZEnvC O?!J<j of applications for declarations of s310 of the Resource Management Act 1991 (the Act) of an appeal pursuant to s 120 of the Act J K & H E SCHWARTFEGER (ENV-2018-AKL-000390) Applicants NORTHLAND REGIONAL COUNCIL Respondent Hearing: Whangarei on 8 April 2019 Before: Judge J A Smith (presiding) Commissioners I Buchanan and R M Bartle...

10. [2017] NZEmpC 109 ALA v ITE [pdf, 162 KB]

    ...matters subject to his confidentiality obligations to the defendant organisation. The timeframe for compliance is immediate. b) It is clear that ITE was well aware of the order. This is evidenced, for example, by what transpired in the three appeals that have been determined subsequently in both the Court of Appeal and Supreme Court. The orders were specific as to what ITE was prohibited from doing; and the orders had immediate effect. c) Non-publication orders were made in...