Search Results

1. [2019] NZEnvC 072 Wilson v Canterbury Regional Council [pdf, 2.5 MB]

   ...Hewitt undertook a site visit to investigate the drain re­ alignment with Mr Dynes, River Engineer EGan. On 29 November 2018 the first abatement notice was served on the appellant requiring compliance by 15 December 2018. Because it was incorrectly addressed it reached the appellant on 6 December 2018". [14J On behalf of Mr Wilson, his solicitors objected to the abatement notice, given the short timeframe. Mr Taylor, EGan Monitoring , responded '2 stating that the abatemen...

2. Waxman v Pal (Application for Non-Publication Orders) [2017] NZHRRT 4 [pdf, 322 KB]

   ...application omitting only that information which could justifiably be withheld from Dr Pal. In the same Minute the Chairperson invited the parties to consider the Tribunal’s then recent decision on non-publication orders, being Scarborough v Kelly Services (NZ) Ltd (Application for Non-Publication Orders) [2015] NZHRRT 43. Reference was also made to more recent decisions of the High Court. Dr Waxman’s submissions were due on 4 October 2016 and those by Dr Pal on 6 October 2016. Pr...

3. Matchitt v Butler - Matangareka 3B (2018) 189 Waiariki MB 74 (189 WAR 74) [pdf, 673 KB]

   ...June to November 2016, following the settlement, as follows: (a) Purchase of a 45 per cent shareholding in Kotahitanga Log Haulage Limited (KLHL) for $400,000; (b) Payment to Robyn Power, partner of John Butler, of $40,000 for administration services to the trust; (c) Purchase of a logging truck and trailer for use by KLHL for $184,000 incl. GST; (d) Payment of $20,000 to KLHL for operating costs of the logging truck. 1 Matchi...

4. LCRO 166/2014 RD v TS (4 August 2017) [pdf, 145 KB]

   ...review set out by Mr RD in support of his application (refer [15] above). However, given Mr RD’s acceptance at the review hearing that he had breached the undertaking, a number of the grounds for review fall away. The remaining grounds have been addressed where necessary. DATED this 4TH day of August 2017 _____________________ D Thresher Legal Complaints Review Officer In accordance with s 213 of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 copies of this decision are t...

5. LCRO 238/2015 NS v LO (28 September 2018) [pdf, 152 KB]

   ...involvement and filed an interlocutory application in the High Court seeking to have Mr LO disqualified from acting because he was conflicted and held information that was confidential or privileged to Mr NS. Mr NS also filed a complaint to the New Zealand Law Society (NZLS) on the same basis. Mr NS considers Mr LO’s independence was compromised. [5] The High Court dismissed Mr NS’ application, saying there was no evidence Mr LO was in possession of confidential or privileged...

6. WHT - Chair's directions for lower value claims [pdf, 174 KB]

   ...repairs, or quotations or estimates for repairs, where appropriate  A list of all the relevant documents that relate to the property  The required application fee. 3.5 Applications must name the respondent(s) accurately and clearly state the addresses of the respondent(s). 4. Responses to the claim (and replies) 4.1 The Act states respondents must file their responses within 25 working days after receiving the claim. This time limit will only be extended in exceptional...

7. WHT Claims under $20k - Chair's Directions [pdf, 174 KB]

   ...repairs, or quotations or estimates for repairs, where appropriate  A list of all the relevant documents that relate to the property  The required application fee. 3.5 Applications must name the respondent(s) accurately and clearly state the addresses of the respondent(s). 4. Responses to the claim (and replies) 4.1 The Act states respondents must file their responses within 25 working days after receiving the claim. This time limit will only be extended in exceptional...

8. AC v Secretary of Justice 4 May 2017 NZRA 002/2017 [pdf, 130 KB]

   ...dated, 7 March 2017, The Secretary for Justice (“the Secretary”) declined approval of the Applicant as a Lead Provider for Criminal PAL 1. 2. The Secretary decided that the Applicant did not meet the criteria for approval under the Legal Services Act 2011 and the Legal Services (Quality Assurance) Regulations 2011 as a provider for the following reasons: i. Mr AC had not demonstrated substantial and active involvement appearing as counsel in at least 3 trials in criminal proc...

9. New fees framework for family legal aid providers - summary April 2012 [pdf, 925 KB]

   New fees framework for family legal aid providers Summary of submissions, response and final decisions April 2012 Although all reasonable steps have been taken to ensure the accuracy of the information contained in this document, the Ministry of Justice disclaims any and all responsibility for any inaccuracy, error, omission, or any othe

10. OIA-124649.pdf [pdf, 3.1 MB]

    ...information, please contact Media & Social Media Manager Joe Locke at media@justice.govt.nz Please note that this response, with your personal details removed, may be published on the Ministry website at: Official Information Act responses | New Zealand Ministry of Justice If you are not satisfied with this response, you have the right to make a complaint to the Ombudsman under section 28 of the Act. The Office of the Ombudsman may be contacted by phone on: 0800 802 602, by email...