Search Results

1. X v Secretary for Justice [2023] NZRA 002 (26 April 2023) [pdf, 242 KB]

   ...cross-examination in “case G”), and the parties’ submissions. [47] The third procedural issue relates to the Court of Appeal decision referred to by Mr. Hurd in his submissions. The Applicant submitted that the Secretary should not be permitted to refer to this decision, in which the Court found that a miscarriage of justice had occurred as a result of the Applicant failing to provide his client with sufficient advice or information before the client elected to give no evid...

2. Godfrey v Harvey [2019] NZHRRT 6 [pdf, 434 KB]

   ...(a) a declaration that the defendant has committed a breach of Part 1A or Part 2 or the terms of a settlement of a complaint: (b) an order restraining the defendant from continuing or repeating the breach, or from engaging in, or causing or permitting others to engage in, conduct of the same kind as that constituting the breach, or conduct of any similar kind specified in the order: (c) damages in accordance with sections 92M to 92O: (d) an order that the defendant perform any...

3. [2015] NZEmpC 24 Lowe v Director-General of Health, Ministry of Health & Ors [pdf, 194 KB]

   ...Lowe made a living in material part from the provision of homecare. As observed by the Court of Appeal this question is one of fact and degree. 16 We are satisfied that Ms Lowe provided Carer Support services with sufficient frequency as to permit the conclusion that she undertook such work on a regular basis. Although, from time to time, she described herself in the relevant invoices as a “friend” of the client, she did not provide these services only as a friend. [55] Ha...

4. Rata - Succession to Paretuaoroa Paretekorae and Haki Rata [2021] Chief Judge's MB 106 (2021 CJ 106) [pdf, 424 KB]

   ...the ōhākī at the succession hearings on 6 August 1962 and 17 June 1970 is not, in and of itself necessarily a definitive test as to whether the Court on those occasions had acted within jurisdiction. 23. Under the present law, Māori are permitted to make written wills in respect of Māori freehold land. This is a power conferred on them by English law and the TTWMA, but not by custom. The written will as it is known in general law, was not part of Māori customary law....

5. [2014] NZEmpC 137 Pollard Contracting Ltd v Donald [pdf, 130 KB]

   ...of 9 Premier Events, above, n 2. the case. In this case, the reasonable steps taken were the filing of the claim with the Authority. [12] Interpreting s 114 in this way might seem to permit a party to short circuit the normal process of dispute resolution which the Act envisages will occur in most cases. That is, a grievance is raised first with the employer and then there is an opportunity for negotiation and discussio...

6. [2019] NZEnvC 153 Selwyn Quarries Limited v Canterbury Regional Council [pdf, 4.7 MB]

   ...consent orders is supported by 1 CRC 155169 being an application to use land to excavate and deposit material over an unconfined or semi­ confined aquifer. The conditions attached to the consent order also refer to CRC 183628, which is a discharge permit to deposit material into land in circumstances which may result in contaminants entering water. The notice of appeal does not appear to concern CRC 183628, and an explanation for its inclusion is required . SQL v CRC - DECISION 2...

7. EMPC Swearing in Judge Perkins [pdf, 217 KB]

   ...politely described as ‘charged’ and, in some such circumstances, attract a great deal of media attention. Notwithstanding these pressures, the Court conducts its work fairly, conscientiously and in accordance with law. This appointment will permit your Honour to further the Court’s work in a jurisdiction of significance. Your appointment also presents an opportunity to reflect on your illustrious career, a career that has all the hallmarks of someone, if I may say so, destin...

8. Hulton Patchell Limited v Mitchell - Pukeroa Oruawhata Trust (2010) 5 Waiariki MB 246 (5 WAR 246) [pdf, 114 KB]

   ...general meeting in which a resolution was passed confirming the resolution made at the 2006 meeting. A majority of 124 owners supported the resolution and 8 opposed it; (b) the doctrine of res judicata does not apply in cases where the statute permits successive applications as determined by the Court of Appeal The Trustees of Pukeroa Oruawhata v Te Kiri Whero Ewa Makareta Mitchell [2008] NZCA 518. Section 244 does not contain any limit on the intervals at which applications can be...

9. ENVC Hearing 6Oct14 AC revised evidence chief Shumane tracked [pdf, 403 KB]

   ...berth holders, will be allowed to enter the restricted area at the cul-de-sac. I agree with Mr Mitchell that such vehicles will be able to enter the marina’s parking facility for drop-off and pick-up while non-berth holders will not even be permitted to enter the cul-de-sac for any drop-off or pick-up. 30. While I maintain the view that this level of drop-off and pick-up activities will occur within the marina’s parking facility I no longer have the view that this volume is in...

10. Leef v Leef - Panguru A47B (2015) 113 Taitokerau MB 11 (113 TTK 11) [pdf, 250 KB]

    ...and sanitary sewerage disposal unit, septic tank and soakage fields and connection pipes to the building is excluded from the sale” (sic). These were to be left in the land. Other clauses addressed the fact that Robert was to take care of all permits etc for removal of the house and was to be responsible for protecting other improvements on the land. [29] Robert paid the purchase price but did not remove the house. It remains there today. Instead, Robert says that after purc...