Search Results

1. BORA Judicature Modernisation Bill [pdf, 321 KB]

   ...discrimination on the basis of age, contrary to s 19 NZBORA. 32.Setting a mandatory limit, however, also has an important purpose: namely the preservation of judicial independence. The importance of this purpose is affirmed by s 25(a) NZBORA, which protects the right to trial by an independent and impartial court, and s 27 rights to natural justice. 33.A mandatory retirement age may be rationally connected to achieving those purposes, as it forms part of a wider range of statut...

2. Cutaran-Tanggaan v Earnshaw [2012] NZIACDT 61 (28 September 2012) [pdf, 81 KB]

   ...lacked capacity, was incompetent, dishonest, and misleading. Each of these is a basis for upholding a complaint under section 44 of the Act. [18] In addition, her counsel submitted there were breaches of statutory obligations under other consumer protection legislation. The response [19] Ms Earnshaw responded to the complaint by letter dated 10 December 2010 addressed to the Authority. The letter stated: [19.1] Ms Cutaran-Tanggaan had been referred by an agent, and her agreemen...

3. Stanimirovic v Levarko [2018] NZIACDT 8 (22 March 2018) [pdf, 119 KB]

   ...involves being a party to unlicensed persons providing immigration services, which is a criminal offence. The Tribunal found the circumstances were egregious as: [2.1] there was no attempt whatsoever to ensure that Mr Stanimirovic received the protections afforded by the Immigration Advisers Licensing Act 2007 (the Act), and the Licensed Immigration Advisers Code of Conduct 2014 (the 2014 Code) (even when Mr Levarko was on notice Mr Stanimirovic was a victim of unlicensed persons...

4. [2018] NZEnvC 117 Sabatier Family Trust v Auckland Council [pdf, 460 KB]

   ...Sabatier in its reply to costs, dated 6 July 2018, at [30). ~ 5 Sabatier, reply to costs, dated 6 July at [7]. ,J W ~. , ,'Ii ~t), ~ j/ .~~ vi' ) ---. .. -"~.-, .~<:: ... / (()/lflT 01; . / 4 [10} Sabatier cites Titirangi Protection Group Inc & Ors v Watercare Services Ltd [2018} NZHC 1026 in support of a proposition that it is unjust to award costs where there has been a denial of a right to participate under the Act, when its participation would other...

5. 2021-11-17 ORC - Closing Legal Submissions - PC8 - primary sector hearing [pdf, 153 KB]

   ...Irrigation Company Limited; (i) New Zealand Deer Farmers Association; (j) New Zealand Pork Industry Board; (k) Ngāi tahu ki Murihiku; (l) Otago Fish and Game Council and the Central South Island Fish and Game Council; (m) Pomahaka Water Care Group; (n) Ravensdown Limited; (o) Royal Forest and Bird Protection Society of New Zealand Incorporated; and (p) Te Rūnanga o Moeraki, Kāti Huirapa Rūnaka ki Puketeraki, Te Rūnanga o Ōtākou and Hokonui Rūnanga (Kai Tahu ki Otag...

6. Maritime Powers Bill [pdf, 151 KB]

   ...offence has been established. We consider that this ensures that searches are rationally connected and proportionate to law enforcement and are not unreasonable. 24. We consider that in both cases the Bill provides an appropriately higher level of protection of personal privacy in the cases of internal searches and collection of biometric information than is provided for general searches of places, property or documents. 25. We therefore consider that the search powers within the Bill...

7. Gwak and Kim TRI-2020-100-006 Procedural Order 11 [pdf, 196 KB]

   ...being void. [70] The Supreme Court held that Mr Thom suffered measurable economic loss in March 1990 when, as a result of the negligent advice of the lawyer, he entered into a non-complying matrimonial property agreement and married without the protection he would have had from a valid agreement. The cause of action arose against the lawyers at that date, the date when the agreement was entered into, not when the defect was later discovered. [71] The Court said that “Mr Thom...

8. [2025] NZEmpC 105 AZK Ltd v JKL [pdf, 219 KB]

   ...Australia Bank Ltd v Dessau [1988] VR 521. [41] In the present case, the breach of contract claims come within the jurisdiction of the Court. The amounts at stake appear to be substantial, such that the applicant may not be sufficiently protected with a freezing order that covers only the New Zealand assets. There is no reason to believe that the risk of dissipation is any less in respect of the Australian assets. The applicant is able to serve the Australian bank and to...

9. LCRO 52/2025 AM v BL (7 November 2025) [pdf, 179 KB]

   ...consideration of penalty, but appears to be secondary to the specific findings in any singular complaint. Therefore I propose that singular examinations do not provide for effective assessment of the holistic impact of persistent failure on the protection of the public, of the preservation of legal standards and the reputation of the legal profession. I am not aware of any specific quantifiable thresholds or red flags which would invoke an automatic internal review. Many could be sug...

10. RN v Accident Compensation Corporation (Cover and Entitlements) [2025] NZACC 140 (1 September 2025) [pdf, 378 KB]

    ...them. “Jurisdiction” and “power” are two distinct concepts… In Mafart v Television New Zealand…the majority judgment of this Court referred to the ancillary powers of the courts as: “ … the authority of the judiciary to uphold, to protect, and to fulfil the judicial function of administering justice according to law in a regular orderly and effective manner.” … The courts' inherent powers include all, but only, such powers as are necessary to enable a co...