Search Results

1. [2011] NZEmpC 132 Kaipara v CHH Ltd [pdf, 125 KB]

   ...upheld the jurisdiction to make an order for security, citing Watson v Fell 2 and Koia v Attorney- General in respect of the Chief Executive of the Ministry of Justice. 3 He also cited A S McLachlan Ltd v MEL Network Ltd, 4 where the Court of Appeal stated that the exercise of the discretion whether to order security should not be fettered by applying any principles but instead the Court must assess the circumstances of the particular case on the basis that access to the Courts f...

2. [2011] NZEmpC 9 Naturex Limited v Rogers [pdf, 103 KB]

   ...that the challenge should never have been filed. 1 AA 320/10, 12 July 2010. [6] In response, Mr Drake submitted that in terms of step one of the “two-step approach” outlined by the Court of Appeal in Binnie v Pacific Health Ltd, 2 “the defendant‟s costs were not reasonably incurred.” Mr Drake acknowledged the general principle that costs should follow the event and be awarded to the successful party but he submitted th...

3. CAC 20005 v Drever [2014] NZREADT 101 [pdf, 40 KB]

   ...6.1 to comply with fiduciary obligations to the client. [10] The context was an auction process of February 2011 where the defendant failed to advise the vendor that the settlement date did not accord with the vendor’s instructions. After an appeal to this Tribunal by the vendor, penalty was settled on the basis of a reimbursement payment of $1,463.15 from the defendant and a co- offender. [11] The second previous case was about a property purchaser on 20 November 2011 misled by th...

4. Lamberth - Heru Te Kaumaiwa Manning Whānau Trust [2014] Chief Judge's MB 365 (2014 CJ 365) [pdf, 314 KB]

   ...rehearing, the Court may affirm its former detelmination, or may vary or annul that determination, and may exercise any jurisdiction that it could have exercised on the original hearing. (6) When a rehearing has been granted, the period allowed for an appeal to the Maori Appellate COUlt shall not commence to lUn until the rehearing has been disposed of by a final order of the COUlt. Case Law [9] In the Maori Appellate COUlt decision of Edwards v Whakatohea ]vf{lOri Trust Boari t...

5. Adams & Anor v Easthope & Ors [2014] NZWHT Auckland 2 [pdf, 110 KB]

   ...claimants settled their claim against all the respondents other than Mr Sayles and Terrence Easthope. Neither Mr Sayles nor Mr Easthope attended the hearing and following a formal proof hearing both were found jointly liable. [3] Mr Sayles appealed the decision. The District Court set aside the orders in so far as they related to Mr Sayles and referred the matter back to the Tribunal. Mr Sayles disputes any liability as he says that he was not the project manager and there...

6. LA - Part 2 - Areas of Law Criminal [pdf, 882 KB]

   ...Provider approval Level/Proceedings Category 4 Youth advocate summary Jurisdiction/Police Prosecutions guilty plea sentencing Bail, name suppression, media coverage Disclosure Status hearing/case review hearing Defended hearing/judge alone trial appeal indictable Jurisdiction/Crown Prosecutions guilty plea sentencing Bail, name suppression, media coverage Disclosure Committal/case review Pre-trial/hearing conference, callovers Pre-trial/hearing applications Trial/jury trial Sen...

7. Von Tunzelman v Southland Regional Development Agency Ltd and Tracey Wayte Ltd (Strike-Out-Applications) [2022] NZHRRT 18 [pdf, 167 KB]

   ...[2021] NZHRRT 30 (Kropelnicki) at [25] to [34]. [9] The Tribunal’s jurisdiction to strike out was also considered by the High Court in Williams v New Zealand Police [2021] 2 NZLR 292 (Williams) at [71] to [76]. While Williams is currently under appeal to the Court of Appeal, it remains a useful current summary of the principles applicable to the strike-out jurisdiction of this Tribunal. [10] The key principles from Lavender, Kropelnicki and Williams can be summarised as follows:...

8. Patena v Cook - Paora Poha Ti Raha Trust (2023) 468 Aotea MB 265 (468 AOT 265) [pdf, 244 KB]

   ...or the potential sale of the Murray Block. This is a problem. It can be illustrated by reference to the submissions for the applicant that argue 1 Nicholas v The Official Assignee - Lot 6 DP 34349 [2021] Maori Appellate Court MB 228 (2021 APPEAL 228) at [9]-[11]. 2 Henry Roach (Petroleum) Pty Ltd v Credit House (Vic) Pty Ltd [1976] VR 309 (SC). 3 The kaupapa of the Act is expressed in the preamble, and ss 2 and 17. It was also discussed in relation to interim injunction app...

9. [2021] NZREADT 48 - Kan (30 August 2021) [pdf, 260 KB]

   ...at [57]. [23] Mr Kan sent the following email to the Tribunal on 12 July 2021 (following service by email on him of the Committee’s penalty submissions): To whom it may concern Re: enclosed information I am in no financial position to appeal this matter and may be put into an undesirable outcome. I make a plea for clemency and ask for name suppression as it will only cause distress and hurt to what is left of my immediate family. I truly and unreservedly apologise for t...

10. [2022] NZEnvC 033 Director-General of Conservation v Whangarei District Council [pdf, 3.4 MB]

    Kauri Die Back IN THE ENVIRONMENT COURT AT AUCKLAND I TE KŌTI TAIAO O AOTEAROA KI TĀMAKI MAKAURAU Decision [2022] NZEnvC 033 IN THE MATTER OF appeals under clause 14 of the First Schedule of the Resource Management Act 1991 in relation to the package of urban services and plan changes to the Operative Whangārei District Plan AND IN THE MATTER OF an appeal in respect of Kauri Dieback Hygiene provisions BETWEEN DIRECTOR-GENERAL OF CONSERVATION (ENV-2020-AKL-127) A...