Search Results

1. [2020] NZEmpC 139 KiwiRail Ltd v Mobbs [pdf, 450 KB]

   ...Introduction [1] At issue is the correct meaning of a retirement clause. Is its meaning plain, or is it such that it requires either corrective interpretation, or rectification? [2] Mr James Mobbs is an employee who has worked on Interislander Ferry Services (Interislander) for many years, employed by KiwiRail Limited or its predecessors. In 2018 he applied for retirement leave, which was declined on the grounds the clause did not cover him. He raised a relationship prob...

2. NZLS Predictions in an Uncertain World [pdf, 957 KB]

   ...Ltd. As can be expected of a supermarket case there were many issues, but the interesting aspect of the decision for this paper are two simple predictions. First the Environment Court accepted62 that an intensive shopping mall in the commercial services zone was “… more beneficial than real”. Second, after many pages of description of the evidence the court found:63 … that the retail premises of the plan as now supported by Council may have some impact on trade at the existi...

3. Kiriona - Estate of Hiromina Ratima Pakai [2017] Chief Judge's MB 35 (2017 CJ 35) [pdf, 220 KB]

   ...marriages. The deceased left a Will which I have not been able to obtain. Evidence at 119 Napier Minute Book 265-266 (8.10.84) and 120 Napier Minute Book 214-215 (22.7.85) indicates Will in favour of 2nd wife. Children are: Name Sex/Age Address 1. Alistair Richard Renata ma 2. Wikitoria Renata fa 3. Hapai Malcolm Renata ma 4. Derek Trevor Renata ma 5. Raelene Renata fa 6. Stewart Tuakana Renata ma There are no legal adoptions in or out of the family....

4. Richards v Rangi - Part Kai Iwi 5E2 and Lot 1, 3 and 5 DP 8968 (2025) 499 Aotea MB 139 (499 AOT 139) [pdf, 317 KB]

   499 Aotea MB 139 I TE KOOTI WHENUA MĀORI O AOTEAROA I TE ROHE O AOTEA In the Māori Land Court of New Zealand Aotea District AP-20230000022978 A20220008032 WĀHANGA Under Section 289, Te Ture Whenua Māori 1993 MŌ TE TAKE In the matter of Part Kai Iwi 5E2 Block and Lot 1, Lot 3 and Lot 5 Deposited Plan 8968 I WAENGA I A Between DONALD RICHARDS Te kaitono Applicant ME And TUI AROHA RANGI, JAMES BALA NAIDU AND WIKI ERUE...

5. [2025] NZEmpC 133 Burgess v Tutton Sienko and Hill Partnership (Interlocutory Judgment (reissued) of Judge KG Smith 1 July 2025) [pdf, 200 KB]

   ...had been able to rebuild his assets or that he has a “significant income on an ongoing basis”. The litigation history was said to show that Mr Burgess’ inability to pay costs is an ongoing problem. [18] Ms Keir also made submissions to address any concerns the Court might have about security for costs stifling Mr Burgess’ challenge. She did so by referring to the conundrum facing Courts discussed by the Supreme Court in Reekie v The Attorney- General.11 That case was p...

6. TC & TD v NV LCRO 255 / 2011 (14 January 2013) [pdf, 138 KB]

   ...of the property was in financial difficulties and had not paid rental and outgoings for the month of November. The solicitor advised that if TC and TD pursued recovery of the ground rent then their client intended to investigate what TC and TD knew about the financial state of the tenant at the time of sale. In this regard, the solicitor questioned whether TC and TD had failed to disclose information in terms of the warranties in the agreement for sale and purchase. Subsequently...

7. LCRO 46/2025 WP v HJ and NB (12 August 2025) [pdf, 204 KB]

   ...alternative legal representation. [10] A further invoice in the sum of $3,588 (inclusive of GST and office expenses) was issued to Ms WP on 7 March 2023. The complaint and the Standards Committee decision [11] Ms WP lodged a complaint with the New Zealand Law Society Complaints Service (Complaints Service) on 28 November 2023. The substance of her complaint was that: (a) the firm had been conflicted when taking instructions from her; and (b) advice provided by the lawyers had been...

8. LM v RB LCRO 332/2012 (15 June 2016) [pdf, 54 KB]

   ...Mr RB undertook any real research or assessment of the caveatable interest”.9 [19] Rule 3 provides: This view formed the basis for the Committee’s finding of unsatisfactory conduct by reason of a breach of rule 3. 3 In providing regulated services to a client, a lawyer must always act competently and in a timely manner consistent with the terms of the retainer and the duty to take reasonable care. [20] I do not disagree with that finding. [21] The Committee determined that M...

9. UW v NG LCRO 152/2012 (27 October 2015) [pdf, 53 KB]

   ...they could have received significantly more for the sale of the home. h. That Mr NG was incompetent in that he did not request a rates notice, and did not research the property market in [Town]; nor did he obtain a report from Quotable Value New Zealand, or a registered valuer. i. That Mr NG seeks to justify the poor service and advice given, claiming the home was in a poor condition justifying the price received, which Ms UW says was not the case. [15] As noted, the Standards...

10. JB v RW LCRO 87 / 2011 (1 February 2012) [pdf, 92 KB]

    ...[1] The review Applicant is Mrs JB (the Applicant) who sought a review of a Standards Committee decision that declined to uphold complaints against Mr RW (the Practitioner). [2] The complaints had concerned the Practitioner’s professional services in relation to the administration of the estate of the Applicant’s mother, as well as legal advice given in relation to a family trust, the M Trust. For the purpose of this review it is not necessary to set out the details of the b...