Search Results

1. LCRO 212/2016 LM v HR (22 September 2017) [pdf, 266 KB]

   ...District Law Society Inc. (ADLSI)/Real Estate Institute of New Zealand (REINZ) form. [6] Clause 3.10 of the Agreement provides:3 The parties shall complete settlement by way of remote settlement, provided that where payment by bank cheque is permitted under the PLS Guidelines, payment may be made by the personal delivery of a bank cheque to the vendor’s lawyer’s office, so long as it is accompanied by the undertaking from the purchaser’s lawyer required by those Guidelines....

2. LCRO 212/2016 LMN Law v HR [pdf, 252 KB]

   ...District Law Society Inc. (ADLSI)/Real Estate Institute of New Zealand (REINZ) form. [6] Clause 3.10 of the Agreement provides:3 The parties shall complete settlement by way of remote settlement, provided that where payment by bank cheque is permitted under the PLS Guidelines, payment may be made by the personal delivery of a bank cheque to the vendor’s lawyer’s office, so long as it is accompanied by the undertaking from the purchaser’s lawyer required by those Guidelines....

3. Final Env-Reg-Report-2017-18 [pdf, 178 KB]

   ...joined an existing directly referred application for consent to upgrade an existing gondola in Queenstown. E.49 7 | P a g e • Lindis Catchment Group Inc – an application for resource consents in relation to the replacement of water permits required to implement an alternative regime within the Lindis catchment. This direct referral joined an existing plan appeal that relates to a related Plan Change to Otago Regional Water Plan. Land Valuation Proceedings As record...

4. [2013] NZEmpC 58 O’Hagan v Waitomo Adventures Ltd [pdf, 125 KB]

   ...amended the costs schedule contained in Sch 3 of the Rules to include “preparation for and attendance at a pre-trial conference.” In the more recent case of Scandle v Far North District Council 9 the High Court noted that the costs schedule permitted costs to be sought for attendance at a judicial settlement conference and made an order that the first defendant was entitled to costs for the day spent at the conference. Similarly, in Roading & Asphalt Ltd v South Waikato Dis...

5. Lake - Ngarara West B3B Trust (2003) 134 Aotea MB 20 (134 AOT 20) [pdf, 415 KB]

   ...failing to provide reports and other necessary information; (a) the Trust has been in place for approximately 19 years but has not provided any tangible benefit to the beneficial owners; and (a) accordingly, there was no reason why the Trust should be permitted to exist any longer. Mr Takarangi submitted that the Trust was in effect dysfunctional and was an impediment to the utilisation and development of the Land for the benefit of the owners. In his submission, given the failure of...

6. Waxman v Pal [2016] NZHRRT 28 [pdf, 71 KB]

   ...calls made by Dr Waxman while at the Panmure surgery. By these means Dr Pal intended demonstrating the dismissal was justified and that no award in favour of Dr Waxman should be made. Unfortunately for Dr Pal the appeal was dismissed as the limited permitted grounds of appeal to the District Court from the Disputes Tribunal do not allow a re-litigation of the evidence. [9] Be that as it may, the significant point for present purposes is that Dr Waxman was served with the appeal papers...

7. [2023] NZEmpC 71 Straayer v Employment Relations Authority [pdf, 228 KB]

   ...http://www.employment.govt.nz/ review provisions could not be cleared and the proceedings were struck out.7 Whether that may be regarded as a procedural circumstance or a substantive one, the fact is if the Court does not have jurisdiction, it is not permitted to assess any perceived merits. The Court did not purport to do so. This consideration has to be placed to one side. [23] I conclude that in this case costs should follow the event and that, subject to the points I a...

8. Reekie v Attorney-General (for Department of Corrections) [2022] NZHRRT 20 [pdf, 229 KB]

   ...to respond within the time limit fixed by s 40(1) and for failing to provide the documents without undue delay. The reference in s 66(2)(b) to “proper basis” is a cross- reference to s 30 of the Act which states that no reason other than those permitted by ss 27 to 29 can justify a refusal to disclose information requested pursuant to IPP 6. [51] Corrections have submitted that the delay may have arisen given the high number of complaints and information privacy requests made by Mr...

9. Pook v Matchitt - Matangareka 3B Block [2020] Māori Appellate Court MB 126 (2020 APPEAL 126) [pdf, 266 KB]

   ...the trust, John Butler in that it was made to his partner. Exacerbating the situation was the fact that at the same meeting held on 29 June 2016, the trustees made resolutions to pay themselves trustee fees absent a clause in the trust order that permitted them to do so, and in the case of John Butler to pay him $20,000.00 as the chairperson’s honorarium. 20 2019 Māori Appellate Court MB 494-530 (2019 APPEAL 494-530) at 527-528....

10. AODT Court Operational Policy 2024 v3.02.pdf [pdf, 333 KB]

    ...to discuss arrangements. The team leader will take responsibility for matters during absences. • An AODT Court lawyer who has recurrent or ongoing scheduling conflicts will be removed from the AODT Court roster. • AODT Court lawyers are not permitted to swap their rostered sessions with other lawyers including other AODT Court lawyers. Any changes must be discussed with and managed via the team leader. • If required and if called upon to do so by the team leader, any AODT Court...