Search Results

1. BORA Manukau City Council (Control of Graffiti) Bill [pdf, 322 KB]

   ...triggered at the point of detention, and a statutory requirement to provide information while arrested or detained raises a prima facie issue of inconsistency under this section. 23. The Canadian Supreme Court has outlined the significant degree of protection that the law affords to the right to refrain from making a statement when arrested or detained. In R v Hebert,[6] McLachlin J (as she then was), said: The purpose of [the right] is two-fold: to preserve the rights of the detained i...

2. Stowers v Short -Tumu Kaituna 14 (2021) 251 Waiariki MB 144 (251 WAR 144) [pdf, 243 KB]

   ...Fulton Hogan advising that they were non-compliant with their resource consent as too much earth was exposed. This was then audited in September 2019 and found to be compliant. [23] The applicant submits that the trustees have not taken adequate care of the trust land in terms of allowing sand mining to continue on the trust’s land and in not protecting its cultural importance. Discussion [24] A somewhat analogous case is found in Hennessy v Parkinson – Himatangi 7 Block,...

3. [2020] NZREADT 03 - AJS Rental Realty Ltd (14 February 2020) [pdf, 164 KB]

   ...auditor, but failed to do so. [12] Ms Woolley submitted that compliance with the audit regulations is not in the category of “something that is nice to have”. Rather, she submitted, compliance is mandatory, and an essential part of the consumer-protection function of the Act. She further submitted that the Agency had been put on notice by its auditor that its practices fell significantly short of the regulatory requirements, and that those shortcomings could lead to a breach o...

4. Port of Tauranga Limited Submissions - 6 December 2017 [pdf, 161 KB]

   ...essentally boils down to a consideration of whether the amendment was reasonably and fairly raised in the course of submissions and, in this case, on appeal - and this needs to be approached in a realistic workable manner. But it also needs to be done carefully, in order to ensure no natural justice issues arise. 14 At [105]. 15 Albany North Landowners v Auckland City Council [2016] 138. 16 At [135]. 6 17. It is submitted that a particular issue for the Court in this case is...

5. [2022] NZEmpC 42 TPT Forests Ltd v Penfold [pdf, 219 KB]

   ...respondents are the best people to assert a claim for privilege as they are the privilege holders, which is in line with conventional discovery processes. [10] An affidavit was filed for a former client of TPT expressing concern that documents protected by legal privilege might be disclosed to TPT under the process it suggests. Another affidavit was filed for a company associated with Mr Stronge’s current employer. It expresses concern that its commercial and sensitive...

6. LCRO 196/2021 DB v HP and JK (28 April 2022) [pdf, 144 KB]

   ...November 2021. His application in large part traverses the issues raised in the course of advancing his complaint to the Standards Committee. [27] These can be summarised as concerns that: (a) The trust set up by Mr JK in 1997 was intended to protect assets from risk of a property relationship claim; and 5 (b) the name of the trust established was not accurately reflected in a copy of a trust deed he had been provided with; and (c) Mr JK had placed his name on title deeds t...

7. 2023-10-11-MTA-Rebuttal-Evidence-of-D-Wilson.pdf [pdf, 228 KB]

   ...15. Mrs Di Rump discusses how we have worked with Ngā hapū o Raukawa and Waka Kotahi in order to see our mātauranga appropriately recognised by the Project in her evidence. 16. Because our mātauranga is a taonga, we as an iwi are very careful about how much we wish to share and with whom. It is important that some of our mātauranga be reserved solely for Muaūpoko people such as our wāhi tapu and whakapapa connections. However, it is equally important that this Project...

8. BX v W Ltd [2023] NZDT 709 (21 December 2023) [pdf, 117 KB]

   ...under New Zealand law. Issue 2 [11] As stated, the respondent is operating a business in New Zealand and therefore New Zealand law applies. In relation to this particular transaction, the relevant law is both the law of contract and consumer protection legislation such as the Consumer Guarantees Act 1993 (CGA) or the Fair Trading Act 1986 (FTA). Contract [12] The respondent has not specifically claimed it is not liable under its contract to refund the purchase price, but I note...

9. Tucker & Ors as Trustees of the Ngahere Trust v Tucker [pdf, 256 KB]

   CLAIM NO: 00540 UNDER The Weathertight Homes Resolution Services Act 2002 IN THE MATTER OF an adjudication BETWEEN GRAEME TUCKER and GLENYS TUCKER and STEPHEN SUDBURY as trustees of the Ngahere Trust Claimants AND ALLAN TUCKER First respondent (Intituling continued next page) Hearing: 13, 14 & 15 December 2004 Appearances: John Ross, counsel for the Claimants David Grindle, counsel for the First Respondent Roger Bowden, counsel for th

10. Morgan v The Real Estate Agents Authority (CAC 20003) NZREADT 82 [pdf, 331 KB]

    ...to sign the agreement. [50] Further Mr Clancy observes, the purchaser’s agency agreement presented to Mr Denize for signature did not comply with certain requirements under the Act and the Real Estate Agents Act (Professional Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2009. It was not signed by Mr Morgan, did not give a dollar amount estimate of the commission to be paid by Mr Denize (as purchaser) to Mr Morgan, nor did it advise that further information on agency agreements and contractual docum...