Search Results

1. Electoral (Registration of Sentenced Prisoners Amendment Bill [pdf, 3.3 MB]

   ...expressed by the majority of the Supreme Court of Canada in Sail# 1) Canada (Chief Eleclowl Ofcei), but are not persuaded that its approach need be followed. Context is important. The Saln)e majority relied on the fact the right to vote was subject to protection from unjustifiable parliamentary limitation.' Any limitation on die right therefore required a special standard of justification, beyond that required for some other Charter rights and freedoms.10 No such special protection...

2. Final-Technical-Assessment-F-Hydrology-and-Flooding-updated-23-Dec-2022_Part2.pdf [pdf, 20 MB]

   ...to produce large changes in peak water level because of the applied changes in topography (i.e., earthworks) and can therefore be ignored. These are not discussed unless there are consequential effects such as high velocities requiring scour protection, or effects extend outside of the proposed designations. 121. Changes in velocity are assessed on a site-by-site basis, including by comparison with baseline velocity in upstream and downstream reaches. 122. Changes in maximum wa...

3. The Trustees of Lake Horowhenua Trust - Horowhenua Block 11 (2012) 285 Aotea MB 135 (285 AOT 135) [pdf, 162 KB]

   ...6 Wall v The Maori Land Court - Tauhara Middle 15 Trust and Tauhara Middle 4A2A Trust (2010) 2010 Maori Appellate Court MB 55 (2010 APPEAL 55) at [33] 285 Aotea MB 139 meeting, or who have work, child care or other care giver responsibilities are entitled to have their views considered in the appointment process. Whether it is called a postal ballot or something else is irrelevant. The short point is that, in taking into account the princip...

4. [2014] NZEmpC 211 Pyne Gould Corp Ltd v West [pdf, 94 KB]

   ...conveniently summarised by Judge Inglis in Liu v South Pacific Timber (1990) Ltd: 2 [10] In exercising its broad discretion the Court must have regard to the overall justice of the case, and the respective interests of both parties are to be carefully weighed. The balancing exercise was summarised by the Court of Appeal in A S McLachlan Ltd v MEL Network Ltd as follows: The rule itself contemplates an order for security where the plaintiff will be unable to meet an adverse awa...

5. Mao v Howitt [pdf, 60 KB]

   ...E2.3.3 Walls, floors and structural elements in contact with the ground shall not absorb or transmit moisture in quantities that could cause undue dampness or damage to building elements. E2.3.4 Building elements susceptible to damage shall be protected from the adverse effects of moisture entering the space below suspended floors. E2.3.5 Concealed spaces and cavities in buildings shall be constructed in a way that prevents external moisture being transferred and causing condensa...

6. LCRO 14/2021 PR and [Law Firm A] v [Area] Standards Committee [X] (30 August 2021) [pdf, 143 KB]

   ...accepted that he had paid Mr KJ a referral fee and that in doing so, he had breached r 5.9. Concession was also made by Mr PR to having breached reg 6 of the Trust Account regulations. 1 Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008 (the Rules). 3 [11] Mr PR denied that he had permitted Mr KJ to use his firms trust account. [12] The Standards Committee delivered its decision on 16 December 2020. [13] The Committee concluded that there was insuf...

7. [2022] NZEmpC 21 Baillie v The Chief Executive of Oranga Tamariki - Ministry for Children [pdf, 222 KB]

   ...has not been stressed. [33] In terms of overall justice, Mr Baillie relies on the submissions on the two other issues and to his swift application to seek interim reinstatement to preserve the status quo. Oranga Tamariki relies on its role in protecting children and young people in its care and notes Mr Baillie’s failure to take responsibility for how the situation unfolded. It submits that prudence and safety favour maintaining the status quo, being that Mr Baillie remains aw...

8. EE v ZX LCRO 95/2012 (10 February 2014) [pdf, 111 KB]

   ...fees incurred with his solicitor which he noted was $500. [14] In its determination, the Standards Committee identified the issues as being: the use of legal processes for an improper purpose, being a breach of Rule 2.3 of the Conduct and Client Care Rules3; and overcharging. The Standards Committee determination [15] Having considered the complaint, the Committee determined to set the matter down for a hearing on the papers and the parties were invited to provide submissions....

9. LCRO 179/2017 VB, CB & ON v QT (14 June 2018) [pdf, 181 KB]

   ...which allows a Legal Complaints Review Officer (LCRO) to conduct the review on the basis of all information available if the LCRO considers that the review can be adequately determined in the absence of the parties. [24] I record that having carefully read the complaint, the response to the complaint, the Committee’s decision and the submissions filed in support of and in opposition to the application for review, there are no additional issues or questions in my mind that neces...

10. LCRO 82/2018 ZI v WS (30 May 2019) [pdf, 242 KB]

    ...Act. 8 Section 12(c) Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 Section 12(c) of the Act defines unsatisfactory conduct as conduct which contravenes any of the provisions of the Act, the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008 (the Rules) or Regulations. Section 107(1) of the Act says the Rules are binding on “former lawyers”. If a finding of unsatisfactory conduct pursuant to s 152(1)(b) is made against a former lawyer, then an order may b...