Search Results

1. IJ v SO LCRO 76 / 2011 (15 February 2012) [pdf, 95 KB]

   ...had been withdrawn, and the Court made appointments in favour of another person who had been proposed by the Applicant. [9] The Applicant was much offended by the allegations against him, particularly those involving financial matters. He claimed to have had incurred 3 significant legal expenses in respect of court applications which he noted were not successful in the event, contending that it was known to the Practitioner to have no prospect of success, adding that it...

2. OJ & RJ v BX & KX [2023] NZDT 527 (29 October 2023) [pdf, 120 KB]

   CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 1 of 4 (Disputes Tribunal Act 1988) ORDER OF DISPUTES TRIBUNAL [2023] NZDT 527 APPLICANT OJ SECOND APPLICANT RJ RESPONDENT BX SECOND RESPONDENT KX The Tribunal orders: The claim by OJ and RJ is dismissed. The counter claim by BX and KX is dismissed. Reasons 1. The parties own neighbouring properties. OJ and RJ’s property sits at the rear of BX and KX’s property and is accessed via a d...

3. Ratahi v Parininihi Ki Waitotara Incorporation - Section 53 Block IX Opunake SD being part Ngati Kahumate Block comprised in CT D4/240 (2007) 195 Aotea MB 127 (195 AOT 127) [pdf, 4.2 MB]

   ...February 2006. Mr Lawrence counsel for a number of respondents wrote to Mr Bulfin on 9 November 2005 raising the issue of jurisdiction but received no reply he says. The matter was set down for hearing on 24 February 2006 but was adjourned at the request of Mrs Hughes QC, counsel for the applicants in the instant case (the respondents in the substantive proceeding) who said she needed time to prepare and to brief rebuttal evidence. The substantive hearing occurred on 16 June 2006 wh...

4. [2024] NZEmpC 149 Osborne v Callaghan Innovation [pdf, 173 KB]

   ...Callaghan Innovation has applied for them to be fixed. It seeks costs of $24,330.20 on a Category 2 Band B basis in accordance with the Court’s Practice Directions Guideline Scale.3 [5] Mr Osborne opposed Callaghan Innovation’s application and requested that any amount awarded against him be reduced from what was claimed. He did not indicate how much the claim should be reduced by or otherwise state what could be considered a just sum to award. [6] In addition to submiss...

5. [2020] NZREADT 19 - Singh - costs (1 May 2020) [pdf, 168 KB]

   ...behalf of the Committee and Mr Singh. The Tribunal did not hold a defended hearing. The Tribunal’s decision (dated 31 July 2018) was published on the Tribunal’s website on 3 August 2018.2 [7] On 10 July 2019, the Tribunal received an emailed request from Mr Edmondson, an attorney practising in the United States of America, for a copy of the Tribunal’s file for the proceeding. Mr Edmondson said that the facts of the proceeding had been part of the record in defamation procee...

6. [2012] NZEmpC 26 Premier Events Group Ltd v Beattie [pdf, 142 KB]

   ...JAMES BEATTIE NZEmpC AK [2012] NZEmpC 26 [21 February 2012] IN THE EMPLOYMENT COURT AUCKLAND [2012] NZEmpC 26 ARC 22/11 IN THE MATTER OF proceedings removed from the Employment Relations Authority AND IN THE MATTER OF an application to strike out affirmative defences BETWEEN PREMIER EVENTS GROUP LIMITED First plaintiff AND BA PARTNERS LIMITED (IN LIQUIDATION AND RECEIVERSHIP) Second Plaintiff AND MALCOLM JAMES BEATTIE First Defendant...

7. IO v AU LCRO 140 / 2011 (17 April 2012) [pdf, 61 KB]

   ...the issue was never discussed with him. He provided copies of letters supporting his recollection regarding the likelihood of success and the costs issue. 3 [9] Another complaint that the Practitioner had failed to release documents as requested by the Applicant was subsequently made. The Practitioner advised that he had never received a request for the documents but that they were available for release either by payment of his fee or payment of photocopying costs “in ac...

8. [2023] NZREADT 35 - UM v REAA (CAC 2103) (13 December 2023) [pdf, 226 KB]

   ...appellant: Self-represented Counsel for the first respondent: M Mortimer-Wang, A Stuart Counsel for the second respondent: R M Stewart, R H Anderson The third respondent: No appearance SUBJECT TO NON-PUBLICATION ORDER RULING (Applications for publication and non-publication orders) Dated 13 December 2023 2 INTRODUCTION [1] This matter concerns a complaint by UM, the appellant, against Ned Gow, a licensed salesperson under the Real Estate Agents Ac...

9. OIA-Compensation for wrongful conviction and detention - rates [pdf, 429 KB]

   Justice Centre | 19 Aitken Street DX SX10088 | Wellington T: 04 918 8800 | E: contactus@justice.govt.nz W: www.justice.govt.nz 6 November 2024 Dear OFFICIAL INFORMATION ACT REQUEST: COMPENSATION FOR WRONGFUL CONVICTION AND DETENTION – RATES Thank you for your email of 15 October 2024 requesting information concerning the determination of the monetary compensation rates in the Compensation Guidelines for Wrongful Conviction and Detention (2023). Your

10. [2020] NZIACDT 28 - XA v Hill (29 June 2020) [pdf, 208 KB]

    ...2 INTRODUCTION [1] Ms Jennifer Ann Hill, the adviser, used an unlicensed employee within her office, her life partner, Mr Gu, to engage with her client, Ms XA, the complainant. Furthermore, Ms Hill lacked diligence in permitting incorrect information regarding the complainant’s work experience to be provided to Immigration New Zealand. [2] The complaint was referred by the Registrar of Immigration Advisers (the Registrar) to the Tribunal. It was upheld in a decision issued o...