Search Results

1. X Ltd v Q Ltd [2024] NZDT 261 (14 March 2024) [pdf, 185 KB]

   ...“company”, “Trust” and “agent” refer either to the entity itself or the individuals concerned, as the context requires. 7. The issues to be resolved were as follows: (a) Did the agent breach the agency contract? (b) If so, is the agent protected by the limitation of liability clause in the Contract? (c) If the agent is liable to the company, is the Trust liable to the agent under the indemnity clause in the Settlement? Did the agent breach the agency contract?...

2. [2024] NZREADT 23 – CAC 2106 v Hu (29 July 2024) [pdf, 255 KB]

   ...(the Committee) with: (1) misconduct under s 73(a) of the Act (disgraceful conduct), or alternatively with misconduct under s 73(c)(iii)(wilful contravention of rr 6.1 and/or 6.3 of the Real Estate Agents Act (Professional Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2012 (the Rules)), or alternatively; (2) unsatisfactory conduct under s 72(b) (contravention of rr 6.1 and/or 6.3) and/or s 72(d) (work regarded by agents of good standing as unacceptable). [3] The particulars of the charges...

3. [2024] NZEnvC 291 Strain v Queenstown Lakes District Council [pdf, 3.2 MB]

   ...of the Schedule) for the approximate location and extent of the four subareas within LCU 11. Vegetation patterns Tall hawthorn hedging and mature poplar trees along the eastern side of Lower Shotover Road. Much of the road-side hawthorn hedging is protected under the District Plan, consent notices or conditions of consent. Exotic shelterbelts, woodlots, remnant gully/riparian vegetation, and exotic and indigenous amenity plantings on older rural and rural residential properties and aroun...

4. [2022] NZEnvC 171 Timaru District Council [pdf, 357 KB]

   ...to come within the ambit of s86B(3) and have immediate legal effect upon notification. Section 86B(3)(a) applies to a rule that “protects or relates to water, air or soil (for soil conservation”. [87] The proposed suite of rules are about protecting the supply of community drinking water to the district, although they regulate activities involving land use and subdivision for the protection of water. [88] The protection of the quality of the community water supply from the e...

5. [2014] NZEmpc 85 McCartney v Atlas Concrete Ltd and First Union [pdf, 107 KB]

   ...shall be final. [11] Mr Cranney points next to what he says is a further protection for members in Mr McCartney’s situation, being an appeal to the next regional biennial conference of the Union under rr 38 and 39. Mr Cranney categorises these protections available to a dissatisfied member in Mr McCartney’s circumstances as “very strong”. Counsel submits that the rules expressly contemplate that the appropriate union official may decide that the Union will not act as reque...

6. Nairn v Peebles LCRO 109 / 2010 (14 December 2010) [pdf, 100 KB]

   ...letter to the 7 Applicant for response, obtained requested information from the Applicant which he then passed on to the purchaser‟s solicitors. There is no mention about information about the acquisition of the title. [24] I have carefully considered all of the above information. It seems to me that since the Applicant asserts that the 23 June letter “highlighted the issue” of the defective title – a matter that he (but not the Practitioner) had actual knowle...

7. Larkins v Kaitaia - Waihou Hutoia D2A Block [2013] Māori Appellate Court MB 159 (2013 APPEAL 159) [pdf, 109 KB]

   ...he considers that he can utilise and manage the interests more effectively than the current trustees. Finally, Mr Kahukiwa emphasised that there was no reasonable disadvantage to the affected parties should termination be granted. [30] Having carefully considered the submissions and the evidence on the Court file, our conclusion is that there is insufficient evidence to make the order sought. This means that there must be a rehearing of the application. The Māori Land Court is ac...

8. BORA Maritime Security Bill [pdf, 59 KB]

   ...contain a reverse onus whereby the accused must prove something in order to escape liability (clauses 66 and 67). We are of the opinion that these provisions constitute "justified limitations" on the right to be presumed innocent that is protected by section 25(c) of the Bill of Rights Act. In reaching this view, we have taken into consideration the fact that the offences in question may be described as public welfare regulatory in nature and the importance of ensuring that the...

9. BORA Unsolicited Electronic Messages Bill [pdf, 332 KB]

   ...in section 25(c) of the Bill of Rights could apply. We note, however, that this issue has yet to be determined in New Zealand and it is unclear whether the courts would agree that individuals facing sanctions under a civil penalty regime have the protections provided for in section 25(c) of the Bill of Rights Act. 31. Irrespective of the debate as to whether section 25(c) of the Bill of Rights Act applies to civil penalty regimes, we consider that these offences would amount to a reasona...

10. Toiloloi v Letalu [2014] NZIACDT 93 (18 September 2014) [pdf, 193 KB]

    ...standards of conduct are maintained in the occupation concerned.” [13] When imposing sanctions those statutory purposes require consideration of at least four factors which may materially bear upon maintaining appropriate standards of conduct: [13.1] Protecting the public: Section 3 of the Act states “The purpose of this Act is to promote and protect the interests of consumers receiving immigration advice ...” [13.2] Demanding minimum standards of conduct: Dentice v Valuers Regist...