Search Results

1. Morison v New Zealand Association of Counsellors [2024] NZHRRT 46 [pdf, 362 KB]

   ...following remedies: (a) a declaration that the action of the defendant is an interference with the privacy of an individual: (b) an order restraining the defendant from continuing or repeating the interference, or from engaging in, or causing or permitting others to engage in, conduct of the same kind as that constituting the interference, or conduct of any similar kind specified in the order: (c) damages in accordance with section 88: (d) an order that the defendant perform any...

2. M v Accident Compensation Corporation (Treatment Injury) [2024] NZACC 88 [pdf, 366 KB]

   ...horrifying. [101] The Court finds the medical evidence from Dr Crim supported by the report of Dr Shaw and the review by Dr Faulkner, together with the evidence of M and the lay accounts filed in the appeal, provides strong evidential foundation to permit a robust inference to be drawn. The Court considers the available evidence enables it to find in Ambros terms, that M suffered a burn injury to his genitals caused by ECT administered at Lake Alice in 1975. 9 Accident Compensa...

3. Rapana v Anderson - Te Kōmiti Matua o te Haahi Rātana (2024) 492 Aotea MB 95 (492 AOT 95) [pdf, 335 KB]

   ...simply because we have not heard from the parties about the directions that would be most helpful. Instead, we offer suggestions as guidance. We remain open to converting our guidance to directions, should the parties agree and our jurisdiction permit. [84] We make the following suggestions: (a) A special Hui Whakapūmau is required. This can only be called by the Tumuaki. As noted, the Tumuaki is selected by the whānau of Tahupōtiki Wiremu Ratana and confirmed at Hui Whakap...

4. [2006] NZEmpC AC 57/06 Kumar v Icehouse (NZ) Ltd [pdf, 114 KB]

   ...serious misconduct. [60] As the Authority is not required to provide a transcript of the evidence it heard as part of its investigation, I am unable to gauge the effectiveness any evidence in chief or of any cross-examination that may have been permitted. I received a copy, by way of an exhibit, of the brief of evidence from Ms Warin before the Authority but, with that exception, I am unaware of what evidence was investigated. It may well be that a different case was presented...

5. [2011] NZEmpC 34 Martin v Northland Education Trust Inc [pdf, 219 KB]

   ...have to be extensive censorship. Although it is perhaps surprising, in retrospect, that the school chose to include a Shakespearean play within the NCEA choices that it had and, especially, to study King Lear among the five Shakespearean plays permitted by the NCEA curriculum in 2009, the fact is that it did so and approved not only the original text but the Longman’s interpretive notes as a teaching aid. [9] Ms Martin had such considerable professional difficulties with both the...

6. [2018] NZEnvC 214 King v Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga [pdf, 13 MB]

   ...the principles set out in the decision of the House of Lords in Newbury,22 namely: (a) that conditions imposed must be for a planning purpose and not for any ulterior one; and (b) that they must fairly and reasonably relate to the development permitted; and (c) that they must not be so unreasonable that no reasonable planning authority could have imposed them.23 These considerations have been held to be of general application in New Zealand law.24 22 23 24 Environment [200...

7. MacDonald v MacDonald - Wairau Block XII Section 6C2C [2016] Māori Appellate Court MB 259 (2016 APPEAL 259) [pdf, 276 KB]

   ...land in all tangible ways. He has offered to buy Brigham’s interest in the land for around double of what Brigham is willing to pay him, but Brigham refuses to sell. Phillip submits that Brigham’s position is effectively that he should be permitted to retain indefinite sole occupation of the land to the exclusion of Phillip. [12] Phillip argues that the lower Court exercised its discretion wrongly in dismissing his application for partition. He refers to the Māori Appellat...

8. Ashworth v Kent (Strike-Out Application) [2018] NZHRRT 55 [pdf, 475 KB]

   ...limitation defence could be raised in proceedings before the Tribunal but whether the Tribunal had sufficient features in common with an inferior court to allow it to be treated as such a court for the purposes of the Judicature Act 1908, s 88B which permitted the restriction of vexatious actions. The Full Court was careful to emphasise its decision should not be construed as a determination that the Tribunal was an inferior court and the decision was expressly confined to the specific c...

9. Haydyn du Fresne v CAC 406, Watkins & Fitzsimons [2019] NZREADT 6 (11 Feb 2019) [pdf, 274 KB]

   ...per cent deposit was in fact all that was going to be required, that is not a matter which involves Licensee 1 who was in no position to influence the question of whether a lesser sized deposit would be acceptable. Assertion that Licensee 1 permitted vendors to inspect the property in his absence [99] The appellant alleges that the purchasers made a pre-settlement inspection of the subject property without Licensee 1 being present. On 4 July 2017, Licensee 1 sent a text to...

10. LCRO 138/2021 & 139/2021 TZ v FK and FK v TZ (26 July 2022) [pdf, 272 KB]

    ...and would not be out of place in any proceedings in which a witness is being challenged. They were not 18 Interestingly, in an interlocutory ruling in connection with the judicial review proceedings, the High Court noted that "[the LVT] permitted cross-examination of Mr FK, and the expert witnesses called by [the COMPANY A] in reasonably forthright terms. The [LVT] itself, or more particularly the presiding judge also joined in the questioning…". See COMPANY C Ltd &...