Search Results

1. Haupini v SRCC Holdings Ltd (Application by Defendant for Costs) [2013] NZHRRT 23 [pdf, 104 KB]

   ...the Director’s decisions and the Minister, in turn, must present a copy of the report to the House of Representatives. [49] In short, it can be argued that while the Director is not exempt from adverse awards of costs, such awards must not be permitted to weaken the Director’s statutory role. He should not, by the prospect of monetary penalty, be discouraged from bringing proceedings within the purposes identified in s 92(2) of the Act. [50] Returning to the facts of the presen...

2. [2023] NZEnvC 025 Minister of Conservation v Marlborough District Council [pdf, 5.5 MB]

   ...Indigenous Biodiversity 8 – 7 The difference in approach recognises that rules in themselves will not improve the overall condition of significant natural areas; only by working with landowners can that occur. However, control through both permitted activity rules (with conditions) and discretionary activity rules for vegetation clearance is also necessary to assist in minimising the loss of ecosystems, habitats and areas with indigenous biodiversity value. Indigenous vegetation cle...

3. [2015] NZEmpC 132 Waterford Holdings Ltd v Morunga [pdf, 197 KB]

   ...on behalf of 8 I acknowledge the issues regarding this approach, as explored in Harris v The Warehouse Ltd [2014] NZEmpC 188. There, Chief Judge Colgan did not finally determine whether s 124 permitted complete remedy extinguishment, stating the issue should be considered by a full Court. As I did not, and could not, receive full argument on this issue in the present case, I consider it appropriate to follow the line of authority w...

4. Apaapa - Te Pura No 17 Block (2010) 6 Waikato Maniapoto MB 1 (6 WMN 1) [pdf, 207 KB]

   ...money, rather he had “inherited” the land via his father. Mortgages were first taken out with the Housing Corporation and Westpac in 1985 totalling $36,500.00 presumably to build a house. Since then the applicants have, for whatever reason, permitted the mortgage to increase to its current outstanding amount of $99,142.23. The evidence is that the applicants have only intermittently in recent years made mortgage repayments. Thus the applicants rely heavily upon their persona...

5. [2018] NZEmpC 88 Lorigan v Infinity Automotive Ltd [pdf, 321 KB]

   ...4 Lorigan v Infinity Automotive Ltd (No 2) [2015] NZERA Auckland 357. the scope of the Authority’s determination is relevant when determining the extent of the issues which the Court is now permitted to reconsider, as a matter of law.5 [21] Three preliminary issues were considered by the Authority. The third of these was whether Mr Lorigan had ever had an employment relationship with SDMG, and therefore whether the claim against

6. Steele v Board of Trustees of Salisbury School [2012] NZHRRT 20 [pdf, 83 KB]

   ...time Mr Steele was becoming concerned that the school, through Ms Kennedy, might not be fully aware of developments in the Family Court. Mr Steele was about to file an application to that Court for determination of the question whether he should be permitted further contact with his daughter. He was equally concerned that the school might be in communication with Mr DB Dennis of Hammonds, solicitors in Dargaville who had in earlier proceedings been appointed as Counsel for the Child....

7. Houpapa v Woods - Taharoa A Sec 6D No 2 (2012) 44 Waikato Maniapoto MB 167 (44 WMN 167) [pdf, 134 KB]

   ...them) will need to be involved in the application or some other steps will need to be taken in order to deal with the restrictions in the trust order. [58] Mr Houpapa’s proposal that, once access is obtained, he will farm the block, is not permitted as such under the trust order. Rather he would need to come to some grazing arrangement with the trustees who would have to take into account the interests of the other beneficial owners. [59] In this application, apart from obtain...

8. [2012] NZEmpC 40 Kaipara v Carter Holt Harvey Limited [pdf, 170 KB]

   ...other than by dismissal. Decision – suspension [42] I have concluded that if his suspension was disadvantageous to Mr Kaipara in his employment, it was nevertheless justified. That is for the following reasons. Mr Kaipara‟s employment permitted suspension to take place. From an early stage of its inquiries, literally within hours of the incident having taken place, it was clear to CHH that Mr Kaipara had failed to follow safety requirements. These failures had been a sign...

9. [2019] NZEmpC 67 Hokotehi Maori Trust v Prater [pdf, 379 KB]

   ...required under the statute when such leave is granted.9 The challenge [24] The Trust brought a de novo challenge to this determination. The essence of its pleading is that there are no exceptional circumstances which would justify Mr Prater being permitted to pursue personal grievances in respect of his dismissal or that there was an unsafe workplace, out of time. 6 At [32] and [33]. 7 At [25] and [29]. 8 At [36]. 9 At [3...

10. LCRO 150/2017 UG v WN [pdf, 275 KB]

    ...undermined. [30] This Office has made the observation that rr 8.7 and 8.7.1:9 … reflect the exercise by the Court of its inherent jurisdiction to control its own processes, one of the aspects of which is the power to determine which persons should be permitted to appear before it as advocates. [31] It is to be emphasised that all of the circumstances described in paragraphs (a) – (d) of the rule must all be present before the prohibition in r 8.7.1 applies. (i) Information th...