Search Results

1. OIA-110232.pdf [pdf, 8.2 MB]

   15 April 2024 S9(2)(a) S9(2)(a) Justice Centre I 19 Aitken Street DX SX10088 I Wellington T 04 918 8800 I F 04 918 8820 ContactUs@justice.govt.nz I www.justice.govt.nz Our ref: OIA 110232 Official Information Act request: Firearms Prohibition Orders Legislation Amendment Bill Thank you fo r your email of 1 March 2024, requesting, under the Official Information Act 1982 (the Act), information regarding the firearms legislation. Specifically, you requested: Could I please rec

2. [2007] NZEmpC CC 23/07 Coy v Commissioner of Police [pdf, 46 KB]

   ...therefore not be permitted to now have them struck out. I find against that argument for the following reasons. [17] The Commissioner’s first response to Ms Coy’s personal grievances was a letter to her from Inspector Gary Lennan, Canterbury Human Resources Manager, dated 1 April 2003. This responded to Ms Coy’s memorandum of 20 March to Inspector Gaskin. This letter stated that the Commissioner had no record of formal notification of a personal grievance of 10 December 20...

3. [2009] NZEmpC CC 7/09 Heritage Expeditions Ltd v Fraser [pdf, 37 KB]

   ...been led to believe that the initial decision was final and will therefore not be prejudiced in the same way. [21] The grounds on which the present application is made are: a) Mr Russ is the sole director of Heritage Expeditions Ltd and is the human face of the company. b) Mr Russ is currently on board a polar research vessel at sea in a remote part of eastern Russia. He was on the vessel from 24 April 2009 until 26 May 2009 when he disembarked at a Russian port and travelled t...

4. Singh v Kumar [2016] NZIACDT 18 (04 April 2016) [pdf, 103 KB]

   ...to file the application at all. It was reasonable for Mr Kumar to give absolute priority to the late instruction, and regard filing a valid application as essential. The Registrar did not challenge 6 Mr Kumar’s evidence inevitable human frailty that caused his memory lapse, and he did not have the time to make the inquiries he would usually make. Accordingly, I cannot find Mr Kumar’s conduct fell short of the professional standards required; he was not negligent. [27] I...

5. [2014] NZEmpC 16 Gapuzan v Pratt Whitney Air New Zealand Services second interlocutory [pdf, 49 KB]

   ...further action was required. [12] On 9 January 2012, ACC declined the plaintiff’s claim and the plaintiff became aware that the defendant had not returned the employer questionnaire to ACC. He contacted the mediator who contacted the defendant’s Human Resources Manager on 10 January 2012. She arranged for the questionnaire to be sent to ACC that day. ACC then reviewed the plaintiff’s claim in light of the answers given in the questionnaire and confirmed its decision to decline th...

6. BORA Securities Legislation Bill [pdf, 122 KB]

   ...CONCLUSION 31. In accordance with your instructions, we attach a copy of this opinion for referral to the Minister of Justice. Roger Palairet Acting Chief Legal Counsel Office of Legal Counsel Stuart Beresford Senior Legal Adviser Bill of Rights/Human Rights Team cc Minister of Justice Footnotes 1 R v Keegstra [1990] 3 SCR 697,729,826. 2 RJR MacDonald v Attorney-General of Canada (1995) 127 DLR (4th)1 3 Advice dated 31 October 2001. 4 Clause 30 – New Subpart 3...

7. BORA Land Transport (Road Safety and Other Matters) Amendment Bill [pdf, 361 KB]

   ...Act into the Land Transport Act 1998. CONSISTENCY WITH SECTION 19(1) OF THE BILL OF RIGHTS ACT Section 19(1) of the Bill of Rights Act affirms that everyone has the right to be free from discrimination on the grounds of discrimination in the Human Rights Act 1993, which include age. A legislative provision may give rise to prima facie discrimination where:[1] a) it draws a distinction based on one of the prohibited grounds of discrimination, and b) the distinction involves di...

8. BORA Waste Minimisation (Solids) Bill [pdf, 410 KB]

   ...CONCLUSION 36. We have concluded that the Bill is consistent with the rights and freedoms contained in the Bill of Rights Act. Jeff Orr Chief Legal Counsel Office of Legal Counsel Stuart Beresford Principal Adviser, Bill of Rights/Human Rights Public Law Group Footnotes 1 Slaight Communications v Davidson 59 DLR (4th) 416; Wooley v Maynard 430 US 705 (1977) 2 [1989] 1 SCR 927 3 R v Jarvis 219 DLR (4th) 233 4 New Zealand Stock Exchange v Commissioner of Inland...

9. BORA Local Electoral (Māori Representation) Amendment Bill [pdf, 274 KB]

   ...before an appointment is made. 2 CONSISTENCY WITH SECTION 19(1) OF THE BILL OF RIGHTS ACT 7. Section 19(1) of the Bill of Rights Act affirms that everyone has the right to be free from discrimination on the grounds of discrimination in the Human Rights Act 1993, which include race. Legislation may give rise to discrimination under s 19(1) of the Bill of Right Act if the legislation draws a distinction based on one of the prohibited grounds of discrimination and the distincti...

10. Tai Rakena v Corrections [2017] NZHRRT 24 [pdf, 151 KB]

    1 IN THE HUMAN RIGHTS REVIEW TRIBUNAL [2017] NZHRRT 24 Reference No. HRRT 058/2016 UNDER THE PRIVACY ACT 1993 BETWEEN MICHAEL TAI RAKENA PLAINTIFF AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS DEFENDANT AT WHANGANUI BEFORE: Mr RPG Haines QC, Chairperson Mr R K Musuku, Member Mr B K Neeson JP, Member REPRESENTATION: Mr M Tai Rakena in person Ms V McCall and Ms G Taylor for defendant DATE OF HEARING: 22 June 2017 DATE...