Search Results

1. Ngā Mātāpono – The Principles: The Interim Report of the Tomokia Ngā Tatau o Matangireia – The Constitutional Kaupapa Inquiry Panel on the Crown’s Treaty Principles Bill and Treaty Clause Review Policies [pdf, 6.4 MB]

   ...Justice NZCA New Zealand Court of Appeal NZHC New Zealand High Court NZLR New Zealand Law Reports NZSC New Zealand Supreme Court p, pp page, pages para paragraph PCO Parliamentary Counsel Office RMA Resource Management Act 1991 ROI record of inquiry s, ss section, sections (of an Act of Parliament) SOE State-owned enterprise TPB Treaty Principles Bill TPOG Treaty Principles Oversight Group UN United Nations UNDRIP United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples v and (in a legal...

2. Stock v Morris - Wainui 2D2B (2012) 41 Taitokerau MB 121 (41 TTK 121) [pdf, 259 KB]

   STOCK V MORRIS MLC 41 Taitokerau MB 121 [1 June 2012] IN THE MĀORI LAND COURT OF NEW ZEALAND TAITOKERAU DISTRICT 41 Taitokerau MB 121 (41 TTK 121) A20090012263 UNDER Section 18(1)(a), Te Ture Whenua Māori Act 1993 IN THE MATTER OF Wainui 2D2B BETWEEN MARY STOCK Applicant AND REX MORRIS Respondent Hearing: 22 October 2009 13 October 2010 7 March 2012 13 April 2012 (Heard at Kaikohe) Judgment: 1 June 2012 RESERVED JUDGME...

3. [2018] NZEnvC 085 Glencoe Land (Joint Venture) Limited v Queenstown Lakes District Council [pdf, 6.5 MB]

   BEFORE THE ENVIRONMENT COURT I MUA I TE KOOTI TAIAO 0 AOTEAROA IN THE MATTER AND BETWEEN AND Decision No. [20181 NZEnvC 85 of the Resource Management Act 1991 of an appeal pursuant to s 120 of the Act GLENCOE LAND (JOINT VENUTRE) LIMITED (ENV-2017 -CHC-000041) Appellant QUEENSTOWN LAKES DISTRICT COUNCIL Respondent Court: Environment Judge J R Jackson (Sitting alone under section 279 RMA) Hearing: On the papers Counsel: J Macdonald for Glencoe Land (Joint Ventu

4. LCRO 57/2014 IW v PP [pdf, 279 KB]

   LCRO 57/2014 CONCERNING an application for review pursuant to section 193 of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 AND CONCERNING a determination of the [Area] Standards Committee [X] BETWEEN IW Applicant AND PP Respondent The names and identifying details of the parties in this decision have been changed. DECISION Introduction [1] Mr IW has applied to review a decision by the [Area] Standards Committee [X] (the Committee) dated 13 M...

5. Family Legal Advice Service Operational Policy v1.7 July 2017 [pdf, 460 KB]

   ...the service must satisfy experience and competency requirements specified in the Legal Services (Quality Assurance) Regulations 2011, equivalent to those required for Family Legal Aid providers • it operates as a specified legal service under section 68(2) (b) of the Legal Services Act 2011, and not as legal aid • payment for the service is by way of fixed fee for each activity. For providers, the distinctive features of the service include: • a straight-forward approval pro...

6. Fehling v Ministry of Health [2017] NZHRRT 31 [pdf, 269 KB]

   ...was justified and whether it was used for a legitimate purpose. DHBs and other health providers can also run audits around who is accessing health information on the NHI through their systems. 37. Further, all NHI messages are protected by a 128 byte encryption as they travel over a virtual private network called the health intranet. The encryption turns the NHI number into a coded form so it is not identifiable and protects privacy of individuals but allows data from different place...

7. LCRO 98/2018 and 201/2018 HK v CN (22 May 2019) [pdf, 238 KB]

   LCRO 098/2018 LCRO 201/2018 CONCERNING an application for review pursuant to section 193 of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 AND CONCERNING a determination of the [Area] Standards Committee [X] BETWEEN HK Applicant AND CN Respondent DECISION The names and identifying details of the parties in this decision have been changed Introduction [1] Mr HK, a lawyer, and at the relevant time a director of HK & Associates, [City] (the...

8. LCRO 185/2017 DO v DP (18 March 2019) [pdf, 237 KB]

   ...section provides that the person who seeks compensation must have “suffered loss by reason of any act or omission of [the lawyer]”. There must therefore be a clear “causative link” between Mr DO’s conduct and the loss claimed by Ms DC. [128] Ms DC claims reimbursement of the firm’s costs, invoiced to the trust, in respect of her recall application. From her analysis of the firm’s time records she calculates a sum of $10,560 plus GST. [129] The Committee, in declining...

9. LCRO 205/2015 R and N FAMILY TRUST v EL (27 June 2019) [pdf, 314 KB]

   LCRO 205/2015 CONCERNING an application for review pursuant to section 193 of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 AND CONCERNING a determination of the [Area] Standards Committee [X] BETWEEN R and N FAMILY TRUST Applicants AND EL Respondent DECISION The names and identifying detail...

10. [2021] NZREADT 28 - New Zealand LJ International Limited & Zeng (15 June 2021) [pdf, 327 KB]

    ...imposed for similar conduct, in similar circumstances. The Tribunal should impose the least punitive penalty that is appropriate in the circumstances. While there is an element of punishment, rehabilitation is an important consideration.4 [66] Section 110(2) of the Act sets out the orders the Tribunal may make by way of penalty. As relevant to the present case, the Tribunal may: 2 Section 3(1) of the Act. 3 Section 3(2). 4 See Complaints Assessment Committee 10056 v Fergus...