Ministry of Justice

Search Results

1. LCRO 097/2023 RQ and EP v OM (14 February 2024) [pdf, 288 KB]

   ...provide opportunity to parties to adduce fresh or new evidence at the review stage. A Review Officer must be cautious to ensure that he or she does not get cast into the role of a “first instance” determiner of the evidence. Such an approach, if permitted, would undermine the very process of review. [88] It is incumbent on a lawyer responding to a complaint to ensure that all material documentary evidence relevant to the issues raised in the complaint is provided to the NZLS. Gap...

2. Darby Trust v Auckland Council & Ors [2013] NZWHT Auckland 1 [pdf, 283 KB]

   ...contractor or project manager, Mr Allen owed non-delegable duties of care to the claimants and that he breached them. [72] The claimants particularise those breaches as follows. They state that Mr Allen was negligent in that he: (a) Caused, permitted or allowed the design of the house to be produced in a manner that lacked the information required as set out at para [25] of the claim. Page 16 (b) Failed to ensure that the contractors and subcontractors involved in t...

3. AML phase II - Business compliance impacts [pdf, 491 KB]

   ...statements or representations whatsoever concerning the report, and the reader acknowledges that it may not rely on any such statements or representations made or information contained in the report. 4. The reader agrees that, to the maximum extent permitted by law, Deloitte, its partners, principals, employees and agents exclude and disclaim all liability (including without limitation, in contract, in tort including in negligence, or under any enactment), and shall not be liable...

4. [2024] NZIACDT 17 – LB v Luv (23 May 2024) [pdf, 298 KB]

   ...refund on about 3 or 18 April 2023. [141] Turning now to cl 24(b), it requires an adviser to ensure that refund obligations can be met. The agreement required the complainant to pay $7,650 in advance of the work being performed, which she did, and permitted Ms Luv to send an invoice for the fixed fee on lodging the expression with Immigration NZ.23 At some point, possibly on 3 December 2022, Ms Luv presumably moved the funds paid in advance out of the client account and into her fi...

5. 2019 Directory of Official Information J-L [pdf, 490 KB]

   ...• leveraging the company’s core competencies by entering into long-term leasing of land for dairy and sheep and beef farming • optimising the company’s genetic capability by marketing its genetically superior sheep, beef and deer • to permit wind farming on its properties as an adjunct to its core farming business and where appropriate, for the purpose of supplying primarily its own energy needs, to develop, operate and own small scale wind turbines on its properties, wh...

6. [2011] NZEmpC 37 Vice-Chancellor of Massey University v Wrigley and Kelly [pdf, 231 KB]

   ...information not be disclosed. It also contains, in s 52(3)(a), a savings provision in very similar words to that in s 7 of the Privacy Act set out above. [86] Both the Privacy Act 13 and the Official Information Act 14 contain provisions permitting requests for information to be refused on various grounds. Mr Chemis submitted that these were relevant under s 4(1C)(a). We do not accept that submission. Those provisions confer a discretion not to disclose information, albeit...

7. LCRO 136/2017 RAI and SEM v EYR, IPA and DYN (26 November 2018) [pdf, 333 KB]

   ...better the contact arrangements between [J] and [Ms JOP] and the better the lifestyle etc for [J] in [City 1], the greater your prospect of succeeding is. I will discuss with you more in person, but one of the considerations where relocations are permitted is a really good co-operative relationship between the parents. That is, if the Court is satisfied that you will do everything in your power 4 to maintain and develop [J] and [Ms JOP’s] relationship despite the distance (rathe...

8. [2021] NZEmpC 35 Radford v Chief of New Zealand Defence Force [pdf, 415 KB]

   ...same way the Court does and for much the same reasons. This analysis is bolstered by considering the changes made to sch 2 and to the Employment Relations Authority Regulations from December 2004. The change was to introduce cl 4A into sch 2 permitting the service out of New Zealand of any document relating to a matter before the Authority. At about the same time regs 19A and 19B were introduced. Under reg 19A the Authority was empowered to grant leave to serve a party overseas.48...

9. [2021] NZEnvC 165 Poutama Kaitiaki Charitable Trust v Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Toanga [pdf, 554 KB]

   ...supported by tangata whenua including Ngā Hapū o Poutama and whānau and hapū affiliating primarily with Ngāti Maniapoto and Tainui waka.48 Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Tama opposed the application on the basis that it would set an unintended precedent permitting “non-tangata whenua” to create a large Māori reservation in areas that traditionally fall within the domain of other iwi, in this instance Ngāti Tama. Such groups could then act contrary to the wishes of tangata whenua...

10. Taueki v Procter - Horowhenua 11 (Lake) (2021) 437 Aotea MB 86 (437 AOT 86) [pdf, 389 KB]

    ...empowers the Court to grant commissions while s 38 includes provision for the Court to approve reimbursements. These are additional powers over and above the Court’s general supervisory jurisdiction regarding fees and expenses where the Court may permit payments to be made to trustees, even in circumstances where the strict formalities and procedures set out in the trust order have not been followed.18 Clause 4.2 of the trust order also specifically enables the Court to approve...