Search Results

1. [2013] NZEmpC 131 Young v Bay of Plenty DHB [pdf, 83 KB]

   ...as to how much of that award vests in the Official Assignee and how much is left to Mr Young for the financial support of himself and his family. [50] That is not a reckoning that the Court can undertake, let alone at this point. In order to permit that to happen, however, the Official Assignee should not be permitted to discontinue or withdraw either Mr Young’s claim to remuneration compensation for those periods or even, assuming liability is established against the d...

2. Pacey v Adlam - Matata Parish 39A2B2B2A and Matata 30A 2A (2016) 147 Waiariki MB 143 (147 WAR 143) [pdf, 260 KB]

   ...there was no adverse interest affected; no question of possible prejudice arose; the application was not opposed; the evidence was unchallenged and germane to the issues; there was no risk of injustice if the evidence was considered; and it would permit the issues to be considered in their full factual context… [33] The High Court recalled the judgment on the basis that new evidence the Court was satisfied that the lease had been granted pursuant to the special resolution, and tha...

3. 2017 NZSSAA 052 (15 September 2017) [pdf, 238 KB]

   ...decisions-makers, in the absence of express statutory authority, remaining anonymous. If we are wrong in that conclusion, and we do have discretion to allow anonymity of the members of the Benefits Review Committees, we do not consider there is any merit in permitting anonymity in this case. [67] The Chief Executive’s justification for claiming anonymity lacks substance. The appellant could create embarrassment, she is highly likely to engage in offensive communications, but th...

4. LCRO 88/2022 GX v EJ (2 April 2024) [pdf, 236 KB]

   ...interest in that he had drafted the invalid Deed of Variation which favoured Mr OM and refused to retire as a trustee when requested. c. He acted in the interests of Mr OM and not in the interests of all beneficiaries by, for example, refusing to permit Ms GX to access funds from the Trust and distributing funds to Mr OM. d. He refused to release copies of documents to Ms GX when requested. e. He did not treat Ms GX fairly and respectfully. f. He failed to protect Ms GX’s interest...

5. Aitken v Laudermilk [pdf, 78 KB]

   ...seal due to the differential movements between the building materials. [54] The water entry has caused cracking in the sheet joints of the plasterboard on the ceiling and beam below the skylight. [55] The Council says that the sealant was permitted under the Building Act 1991 and the Building Regulations 1992 and was only expected to have a life span of 5 years. The Council argues that the claimants have failed to maintain the seals so the sealant, at the time of final insp...

6. Pirikahu v Hohaia - Awanui Haparapara No 1 (2021) 253 Waiariki MB 112 (253 WAR 112) [pdf, 297 KB]

   ...[91] If the kaitiaki trust had not terminated on the death of the late Parehuia Durie in 2007 Gloria Graham would have been removed for cause as a trustee for failing to carry out the duties of a trustee satisfactorily, for failing to account, for permitting herself to profit from her office as a trustee and for permitting her interests to conflict with her duties to the beneficiaries of the trust. (Emphasis added) [16] Then in Nicholas v Gibbons - Poike 8E the Māori Appellate Cou...

7. [2014] NZEmpC 159 Franix Construction Ltd v Tozer [pdf, 146 KB]

   ...in judicial review proceedings, they do not form part of the very limited record from the Authority’s investigation on a challenge such as this. Counsel for one of the parties was also that party’s representative in the Authority but was not permitted to give evidence from the Bar to contradict a witness’s account of what was or was not said in the Authority. [4] In all the foregoing circumstances, there is little or no probative value in pursuing such alleged inconsistencies...

8. [2019] NZEmpC 37 Derbie v Tranzurban Hutt Valley Ltd [pdf, 674 KB]

   ...The LTA and the Rule made thereunder have a focus on the safety of the travelling public, and fatigue management. Logically, the two regimes should operate side-by-side so that both objectives can be achieved. An interpretation of s 69ZH which permits both regimes to operate in parallel is, in my view, more likely to have been Parliament’s intent. This was the finding in Jetstar.12 [37] The legislative history does not suggest a contrary conclusion. Whilst it is the case th...

9. Tairua v Aati - Estate of Mere Hare Kerepeti [2020] Maori Appellate Court MB 224 (2020 Appeal 224) [pdf, 308 KB]

   ...that there can be no presumption that the evidence should be believed as the evidence is in the nature of an assertion of personal recollection and speculation. Finally, Mr Watson submitted that there were not any exceptional circumstances to permit the filing of further evidence as per Faulkner v Hoete.13 12 Dragicevich v Martinovich (1969) NZLR 306 (CA). 13 Faulkner v Hoete - Motiti North C No 1 [2017] Māori Appellate Court MB 1...

10. NZLS 19 Mar 2013 Giving Evidence [pdf, 281 KB]

    ...compelled to answer questions that would incriminate you. If you feel that giving evidence might incriminate you, talk to a lawyer about that. Usually, a witness gives evidence orally in a courtroom. However, there are other ways in which the judge can permit a witness to give evidence, including: ·· giving evidence while screened from the defendant; ·· giving evidence-in-chief by video record; ·· giving evidence by closed circuit television from another room in the courthouse;...