Search Results

1. Marshall v IDEA Services Ltd (Application for Interim Non-Publication Orders) [2019] NZHRRT 52 [pdf, 306 KB]

   ...(other than Eamon Marshall) mentioned in the evidence in these proceedings is prohibited. [42.2] There is to be no search of the Tribunal file without leave of the Chairperson or of the Tribunal. The plaintiff and defendant are to be notified of any request to search the file and given opportunity to be heard on that application. [42.3] Leave is reserved to both parties to make further application should the need arise. ............................................. Mr RPG H...

2. DOP v Nelson (Application for In-Court Media Coverage) [2013] NZHRRT 13 [pdf, 46 KB]

   1 IN THE HUMAN RIGHTS REVIEW TRIBUNAL [2013] NZHRRT 13 Reference No. HRRT 026/2012 UNDER SECTION 50 OF THE HEALTH AND DISABILITY COMMISSIONER ACT 1994 IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION FOR IN-COURT MEDIA COVERAGE BETWEEN DIRECTOR OF PROCEEDINGS PLAINTIFF AND RUTH NELSON DEFENDANT TRIBUNAL: Mr RPG Haines QC, Chairperson REPRESENTATION: Mr A Martin, Director and Ms Cook Mr A Beck for defendant Ms B Torrie for Fairfax Ltd...

3. Benjamin v Southern District Health Board (Strike-Out Application) [2020] NZHRRT 21 [pdf, 177 KB]

   ...also concerned that the information was used and disclosed in a way that was an interference with her privacy. 1 [This decision is to be cited as Benjamin v Southern District Health Board (Strike-Out application) [2020] NZHRRT 21.] IN THE HUMAN RIGHTS REVIEW TRIBUNAL [2020] NZHRRT 21 2 [2] Ms Benjamin complained to the Privacy Commissioner, but the Privacy Commissioner decided, after correspondence with Ms Benjamin’s lawy...

4. Director of Proceedings v Smith (Application for Final Non-Publication Orders) [2019] NZHRRT 32 [pdf, 695 KB]

   ...Member REPRESENTATION: Ms V Casey QC and Ms J Herschell for plaintiff Mr L Taylor QC and Ms R Scott for defendant DATE OF HEARING: 26 and 27 November 2018 DATE OF DECISION: 17 June 2019 (REDACTED) DECISION OF TRIBUNAL ON APPLICATION BY DEFENDANT FOR FINAL NAME SUPPRESSION ORDERS1 INDEX 1 [This decision is to be cited as Director of Proceedings v Smith (Application for Final Non-Publication Orders)...

5. Idea Services v Attorney-General (Interim Order Application) [2013] NZHRRT 24 [pdf, 148 KB]

   ...remedies have been referred to the High Court. 3.2 There is no power to make interim orders against the Crown under s 95 of the Human Rights Act 1993. 3.3 Granting the interim orders would improve rather than simply preserve the position of the applicant: 3.3.1 The respondent is already in compliance with the decision of the High Court in Attorney-General on behalf of the Ministry of Health v IDEA Services Limited [2012] NZHC 3229 (the High Court decision); 3.3.2 Payment by the resp...

6. Doria v Diamond Laser Medispa Taupo Ltd (Strike-Out Application) [2018] NZHRRT 50 [pdf, 236 KB]

   ...Hickey MNZM, Member Mr RK Musuku, Member REPRESENTATION: Ms J Emerson for plaintiff Ms K McDonald for defendants DATE OF HEARING: Heard on the papers DATE OF DECISION: 20 November 2018 DECISION OF TRIBUNAL DISMISSING APPLICATION TO STRIKE OUT CLAIM1 1 [This decision is to be cited as Doria v Diamond Laser Medispa Taupo Ltd (Strike-Out Application) [2018] NZHRRT 50.] IN THE HUMAN RIGHTS REVIEW TRIBUNAL [20...

7. Koyama v New Zealand Law Society (Application by Defendant for Costs) [2013] NZHRRT 22 [pdf, 64 KB]

   1 IN THE HUMAN RIGHTS REVIEW TRIBUNAL [2013] NZHRRT 22 Reference No. HRRT 030/2009 & 031/2009 UNDER THE HUMAN RIGHTS ACT 1993 AND UNDER THE PRIVACY ACT 1993 IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION BY THE DEFENDANT FOR COSTS BETWEEN TATSUHIKO KOYAMA PLAINTIFF AND NEW ZEALAND LAW SOCIETY DEFENDANT AT AUCKLAND BEFORE: Mr RPG Haines QC, Chairperson Mr RK Musuku, Member Mr BK Neeson, Member REPRESENTATION: Mr Koyama in person Mr...

8. Apostolakis v Attorney-General No. 2 (Strike-Out Application) [2017] NZHRRT 53 [pdf, 201 KB]

   ...Member Mr BK Neeson JP, Member REPRESENTATION: Mrs K Apostolakis in person Ms V McCall for defendant DATE OF HEARING: Heard on the papers DATE OF DECISION: 1 December 2017 DECISION OF TRIBUNAL STRIKING OUT STATEMENT OF CLAIM1 INTRODUCTION [1] The Attorney-General applies to strike out the plaintiff’s claim on the basis that it discloses no reasonably arguable cause of action and is an abuse of process. [2] Mrs Apostolakis then sought the consolidati...

9. Waxman v Pal (Application for Non-Publication Orders) [2017] NZHRRT 4 [pdf, 322 KB]

   ...in “[w]here the Tribunal is satisfied it is desirable to do so”. [46.2] This point appears to have been overlooked when s 107(3) was considered in Haydock v Gilligan Sheppard. In that case the High Court at [23] emphasised the need for an applicant to establish “very special circumstances” or a “compelling reason” before a suppression order can be made. Significantly the judgment makes no reference to the actual text of s 107(3): Arguably the Tribunal adopted a test whi...

10. Watson v Accident Compensation Corporation (Application for recall of judgment) [2024] NZACC 34 [pdf, 229 KB]

    ...2024. [3] For the purposes of this application, it is not necessary to set out the judgment of 8 January 2024 in any detail. The Court reached the view that Ms Watson is not entitled to deemed cover for CRPS. This is because of the absence of a claim for cover for CRPS, such claim being the vital missing link in the chain of events prescribed for cover by the governing Act. The Court noted that it does not have the power to override the express provision of the Act which required...