I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TE ROTORUA-NUI-A-KAHUMATAMOMOE ROHE CIV [2018] NZHC NGĀTI WĀHIAO Defendant
|
|
- Brandon Mathews
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND ROTORUA REGISTRY I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TE ROTORUA-NUI-A-KAHUMATAMOMOE ROHE CIV [2018] NZHC 1991 BETWEEN AND NGĀTI HURUNGATERANGI, NGĀTI TAEOTU ME NGĀTI TE KAHU O NGĀTI WHAKAUE Plaintiffs NGĀTI WĀHIAO Defendant Hearing: Counsel: (On the papers) Craig Orton for the Plaintiffs Angelo Papageorgiou and Felix Geiringer for Defendant Judgment: 7 August 2018 [COSTS] JUDGMENT OF MOORE J This judgment was delivered by me on 7 August 2018 at 2:30 pm pursuant to Rule 11.5 of the High Court Rules. Registrar/ Deputy Registrar Date: NGĀTI HURUNGATERANGI & ORS v NGĀTI WĀHIAO [2018] NZHC 1991 [7 August 2018]
2 Introduction [1] For over five years the parties in this proceeding have been involved in a dispute in various fora about who has mana whenua over lands near Rotorua known as Whakarewarewa and Arikikapakapa ( the lands ). Now that the Court of Appeal has referred the dispute back to arbitration, 1 costs are sought on various steps taken in this Court. This judgment resolves those applications. Background [2] To understand why the proceedings have reached this stage, and the steps for which costs are now sought, some context is required. [3] In 2008, over 100 years after decisions of the Native Land Court enabled the Crown to acquire the lands, it agreed to return them to the parties: Ngāti Hurungaterangi, Ngāti Taeotu me Ngāti Te Kahu o Ngāti Whakaue ( Ngāti Whakaue ), and those hapū comprising Tuhourangi Ngāti Wāhiao ( Ngāti Wāhiao ). Ngāti Whakaue and Ngāti Wāhiao were unable to agree on which was entitled to the lands, but agreed to establish a joint trust to take title to the lands until determination of their competing claims. [4] Eventually, their dispute over who had mana whenua was referred to arbitration under the trust deed. The arbitral panel delivered an interim decision on 7 June 2013 which it adopted in whole as the final award on 14 November It determined that the lands should be apportioned equally between Ngāti Whakaue and Ngāti Wāhiao. [5] Ngāti Whakaue were dissatisfied and challenged the award, seeking leave to appeal to the High Court. Duffy J declined to grant leave, 2 and an application in this Court for to appeal that decision to the Court of Appeal was also declined ( First Leave to Appeal to CA Decision ), but special leave was granted by the Court of Appeal. 3 1 Ngāti Hurungaterangi v Ngāti Wahiao [2017] NZCA 429, [2017] 3 NZLR 770 [Substantive CA Decision]. 2 Ngāti Hurungaterangi v Ngāti Wahiao [2014] NZHC 846 [HC Leave Decision]. 3 Ngāti Hurungaterangi v Ngāti Wahiao [2014] NZCA 592 [CA Special Leave Decision].
3 [6] Duffy J granted the parties leave to file memoranda as to costs on her decision. 4 In a Minute dated 24 March 2015, she declined to deal with the Ngāti Wāhiao s costs application on the basis her decision had been successfully appealed to the Court of Appeal. But she reserved leave to make further applications at a later date if the parties could not agree. [7] I then heard the substantive appeal. In a decision of 1 July 2016 I dismissed it, finding there were no errors of law in the panel s decision. 5 I indicated Ngāti Wāhiao, as the successful party, was entitled to costs on a 3B basis, which the parties agreed was the appropriate scale. 6 But I later granted leave for Ngāti Whakaue to appeal my decision on approved questions of law. 7 Because Ngāti Whakaue were successful in that application, I awarded them costs on a 3B basis. 8 [8] The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, finding the panel erred in failing to make reasoned findings as to who the beneficial owners of the lands were before 1893, failing to determine the parties claims having regard to those findings, and allocating beneficial ownership according to broad conceptions of fairness. [9] The Court of Appeal awarded costs on the appeal, but did not make directions for the treatment of costs awarded or yet to be awarded for earlier decisions. That is why Ngāti Whakaue have now applied for determination of costs on the earlier proceedings in this Court. The costs application [10] Having succeeded in the Substantive CA Decision, Ngāti Whakaue seek: (a) costs on Duffy J s HC Leave Decision and the First Leave to Appeal to CA Decision; and 4 HC Leave Decision, above n 2, at [22]. 5 Ngāti Hurungaterangi v Ngāti Wahiao [2016] NZHC 1486, [2016] 3 NZLR 378 [Substantive HC Decision]. 6 At [216]-[217]. 7 Ngāti Hurungaterangi v Ngāti Wahiao [2016] NZHC 3156 [Second Leave to Appeal to CA Decision]. 8 At [34].
4 (b) costs on my Substantive HC Decision. [11] In his memorandum on behalf of Ngāti Wāhiao dated 5 April 2018, Mr Geiringer: (a) opposes costs being awarded on the HC Leave Decision, on the basis Ngāti Whakaue were ultimately successful on a different basis in the Substantive CA Decision; 9 (b) accepts costs on the Substantive HC Decision should now be awarded to Ngāti Whakaue, but disputes the quantum of the award sought; and (c) seeks recall of the Second Leave to Appeal to CA Decision, on the basis costs should be redetermined in light of the Substantive CA Decision and because Ngāti Wāhiao was not heard on the application. 10 [12] After inspecting the memoranda filed by the parties, I considered there was substantial agreement on the form of an award: having been successful in the Court of Appeal, Ngāti Whakaue are entitled to costs, on a 3B basis. The question now is what matters should be covered by that order, and whether there are any matters justifying an uplift or reduction in costs. I sought a joint memorandum identifying areas of agreement and disagreement which needed to be resolved. I also invited counsel to, if possible, reach agreement on how costs on the Second Leave to Appeal to CA Decision should be addressed. [13] A joint memorandum was filed on 1 June Although it helpfully set out areas of agreement, the parties were not able to narrow the issues for resolution. Should costs be awarded to Ngāti Whakaue on the Stage One proceedings? [14] In her Minute of 24 March 2015 Duffy J commented the basis on which Ngāti Wāhiao sought costs in this Court no longer exists, and that if the parties could not 9 I refer to these as the Stage One proceedings. 10 I refer to the Substantive HC Decision and the Second Leave to Appeal to CA Decision as the Stage Two proceedings.
5 reach agreement on the appropriate costs to be paid for the Stage One proceedings then leave was reserved for them to make a further application for costs. By memorandum of 15 March 2018, Ngāti Whakaue sought costs on the Stage One proceedings on a 2B basis totalling $15, and $2, in disbursements. [15] Ngāti Wāhiao argue no costs should be awarded for the Stage One proceedings, as success in the CA Special Leave Decision which overturned the decisions in this Court declining to grant Ngāti Whakaue leave to appeal is not a proper basis to award costs. That is because the only ground on which Ngāti Whakaue ultimately succeeded was inadequacy of reasons, a ground not advanced in either Stage One hearing in this Court. That ground was argued for the first time in the CA Special Leave Decision. Generally, Mr Geiringer points out the grounds on which leave was granted by the Court of Appeal are formulated differently from the grounds argued in this Court. [16] Analogy with Ireland v Grant is available. 11 In that case Gendall J originally awarded costs to the party that successfully opposed leave being granted to the Court of Appeal. Special leave to appeal was granted by the Court of Appeal, although the appeal proper was unsuccessful. When the matter returned to the High Court on the question of costs, the appellant argued the leave costs award should be varied under r 14.8(2) as the Court of Appeal s special leave decision showed the order declining leave should not have been made. Gendall J declined to vary the award. His reasons are instructive: 12 (a) the ultimate outcome revealed the leave decision was correct; (b) the discretion to grant leave in the High Court and special leave in the Court of Appeal are separate and distinct jurisdictions, and the fact that the Court of Appeal granted special leave does not mean that the High Court ought not to have granted leave; and (c) all awards of costs are specific to the individual circumstances of the case. 11 Ireland v Grant [2016] NZHC At [24].
6 [17] In the particular circumstances of this case the proper outcome is that costs lie where they fall. For the reasons set out by Mr Geiringer, the CA Special Leave Decision has not shown either Stage One proceeding in this Court to be in error. In fact all of the grounds of appeal advanced in this Court during the Stage One proceedings ultimately failed; the ground on which Ngāti Whakaue ultimately succeeded was the ground which appeared for the first time in the CA Special Leave Decision. [18] In that context I do not consider Ngāti Whakaue is entitled to costs for the Stage One proceedings in this Court. Neither do I consider Ngāti Wāhiao should be awarded costs, as Mr Geiringer responsibly accepts. I agree that the appropriate order in the circumstances is that costs on these proceedings should lie where they fall. What costs should be awarded for the Substantive HC Decision? [19] Ngāti Wāhiao concedes Ngāti Whakaue is entitled to 3B costs. Ngāti Whakaue seeks costs and disbursements totalling $32, in relation to the Substantive HC Decision. This amount represents an adjusted figure which reflects some of Ngāti Wāhiao s objections. Ngāti Wāhiao continues to dispute the quantum, and submits no more than $22, should be awarded. [20] I agree that some adjustment is necessary for the $3, in disbursements Ngāti Whakaue claims for preparing a transcript of the arbitration for the purpose of the appeal. Mr Geiringer advises (without disagreement from Mr Kahukiwa) that the transcript was over two months late and unusable. Ultimately Ngāti Wāhiao was required to pay to correct the transcript. Disbursements are only to awarded to the extent they are reasonably necessary for the conduct of the proceeding. Given the expense Ngāti Wāhiao was put to in correcting the transcript, I do not consider the costs incurred by Ngāti Whakaue were reasonably necessary and claimable as disbursements. [21] Otherwise I do not consider adjustment from the amount claimed is necessary. While in no Court did Ngāti Whakaue succeed in its argument concerning s 348 of the Te Ture Whenua Māori Act 1993, that by itself is not a basis on which to reduce costs. The argument was not so meritless that it unnecessarily contributed to the expense of
7 the proceeding. The Court of Appeal s ultimate conclusion, framed similarly to my own, was while it was regrettable that the panel did not directly address this argument, consideration of it was nevertheless implicit in its decision. 13 This conclusion is reinforced by the Court of Appeal not making any reduction in costs on this basis. I see no reason to depart from that position. [22] Likewise I do not consider the delay caused by Ngāti Whakaue s failure to produce a workable transcript is grounds for a global reduction. That factor has been adequately taken into account in declining to award Ngāti Whakaue disbursements for this step. How should the Second Leave to Appeal to CA Decision costs awarded be dealt with? [23] I awarded $19, in costs to Ngāti Whakaue in relation to its successful application to appeal the Substantive HC Decision. Ngāti Wāhiao now seeks that the decision be recalled on the basis the award was obtained without Ngāti Wāhiao being served with the application. [24] Rather than ordering recall, I prefer to exercise my power under r 14.8(2) of the High Court Rules 2016 ( the Rules ) to vary the earlier order for costs. I consider the application and my order fits within the definition of interlocutory application and order in the Rules, 14 or is sufficiently analogous that r 14.8(2) should apply in terms of r Moreover I consider variation is appropriate both in light of the Court of Appeal s decision and the fact Ngāti Wāhiao did not earlier have an opportunity to respond. [25] Because the application for leave to appeal was an interlocutory application, costs are not claimable under steps 37 and That means Ngāti Whakaue is 13 Substantive CA Decision, above n 1, at [94] and Substantive HC Decision, above n 5, at [72]-[73]. 14 The position taken by the learned authors of McGechan on Procedure (online looseleaf ed, Thomson Reuter,) at [HR ] is that such applications for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal under cl 5(1)(a) or (b), sch 2 of the Arbitration Act 1996 are interlocutory applications. Given the similarity in the procedure under rr and 26.19, there is no reason in principle why the same would not be true of applications for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal under cl 5(1)(c). 15 See Lawson v Wenley (No 2) [2012] NZHC 1265 at [7].
8 entitled to $1,980 for the preparation and filing of the application only. As for the remaining steps, I accept that: (a) Ngāti Whakaue relied on the Case on Appeal bundle at the leave hearing, so no costs are claimable for the preparation of a bundle for hearing; (b) unspecified office charges of $ are not recoverable disbursements; 16 but (c) I indicated in my decision costs were to include the appearance of second counsel, and I see no reason to order otherwise now. 17 [26] Accordingly I vary my earlier costs order and award Ngāti Whakaue costs and disbursements in the sum of $9,405. Orders [27] Costs on the Stage One proceedings are to lie where they fall. [28] Ngāti Whakaue is entitled to costs and disbursements totalling $29, associated with the Substantive HC Decision. [29] Ngāti Whakaue is entitled to costs and disbursements totalling $9,405 associated with the Second Leave to Appeal to CA Decision. Moore J Solicitors/Counsel: Corban Revell, Auckland Mr Geiringer, Wellington Mr Papageorgiou, Wellington 16 Opus International Consultants Ltd v Colac Bay Vision Ltd [2015] NZHC 2702 at [7]. 17 Second Leave to Appeal to CA Decision, above n 7, at [34].
I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA ŌTAUTAHI ROHE CIV [2018] NZHC 971. IN THE MATTER of the Companies Act 1993
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND CHRISTCHURCH REGISTRY I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA ŌTAUTAHI ROHE CIV-2016-409-000814 [2018] NZHC 971 IN THE MATTER of the Companies Act 1993 BETWEEN AND THE COMMISSIONER
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND ROTORUA REGISTRY CIV [2016] NZHC NGĀTI WAHIAO Respondent
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND ROTORUA REGISTRY CIV-2013-463-000448 [2016] NZHC 1486 BETWEEN AND NGĀTI HURUNGATERANGI, NGĀTI TAEOTU ME NGĀTI TE KAHU O NGĀTI WHAKAUE Appellants NGĀTI WAHIAO Respondent
More informationI TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA ŌTAUTAHI ROHE CIV [2018] NZHC 67. Plaintiff. THE EARTHQUAKE COMMISSION First Defendant
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND CHRISTCHURCH REGISTRY I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA ŌTAUTAHI ROHE CIV-2013-409-1775 [2018] NZHC 67 BETWEEN AND AND XIAOMING HE Plaintiff THE EARTHQUAKE COMMISSION First Defendant
More informationI TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TAURANGA MOANA ROHE CIV [2018] NZHC 936
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND TAURANGA REGISTRY I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TAURANGA MOANA ROHE BETWEEN AND CIV-2018-470-17 [2018] NZHC 936 NGAI TE HAPU INCORPORATED and NGA POTIKI A TAMAPAHORE TRUST
More informationI TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU ROHE CRI [2018] NZHC 596. UNDER the Criminal Procedure Act 2011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU ROHE CRI-2017-404-000402 [2018] NZHC 596 UNDER the Criminal Procedure Act 2011 BETWEEN AND DERMOT GREGORY NOTTINGHAM
More informationI TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU ROHE CIV [2017] NZHC UNDER the Insolvency Act 2006 PRESCOTT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU ROHE CIV-2017-404-1097 [2017] NZHC 2701 UNDER the Insolvency Act 2006 IN THE MATTER OF BETWEEN AND the bankruptcy
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND INVERCARGILL REGISTRY CIV [2016] NZHC TONI COLIN REIHANA Applicant
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND INVERCARGILL REGISTRY CIV-2014-425-000102 [2016] NZHC 2048 UNDER the Judicature Amendment Act 1972 IN THE MATTER BETWEEN AND AND AND of Judicial Review and related tortious
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WELLINGTON REGISTRY CIV [2016] NZHC TE RUNANGA O NGĀTI MANAWA Plaintiff
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WELLINGTON REGISTRY CIV-2011-485-1233 [2016] NZHC 1183 UNDER IN THE MATTER OF BETWEEN AND the Judicature Amendment Act 1972 an/or Part 30 of the High Court Rules Central
More informationI TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU ROHE CIV [2017] NZHC CLARK ROAD DEVELOPMENTS LIMITED Applicant
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU ROHE BETWEEN AND CIV-2017-404-002165 [2017] NZHC 2589 CLARK ROAD DEVELOPMENTS LIMITED Applicant GRANDE MEADOW
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY CIV [2016] NZHC WATER GUARD NZ LIMITED Plaintiff
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY CIV-2014-404-000445 [2016] NZHC 1546 BETWEEN AND WATER GUARD NZ LIMITED Plaintiff MIDGEN ENTERPRISES LIMITED First Defendant DAVID JAMES MIDGEN Second
More informationI TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TE WHANGANUI-Ā-TARA ROHE CIV [2018] NZHC WELLINGTON CITY COUNCIL First Respondent
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WELLINGTON REGISTRY I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TE WHANGANUI-Ā-TARA ROHE BETWEEN AND AND CIV-2017-485-803 [2018] NZHC 1041 ENTERPRISE MIRAMAR PENINSULA INCORPORATED Applicant
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY CIV [2014] NZHC 2483 BETWEEN. Plaintiff
NOTE: PURSUANT TO S 437A OF THE CHILDREN, YOUNG PERSONS, AND THEIR FAMILIES ACT 1989, ANY REPORT OF THIS PROCEEDING MUST COMPLY WITH SS 11B TO 11D OF THE FAMILY COURTS ACT 1980. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION,
More informationRICHARD LYALL GENGE Applicant. VISITING JUSTICE CHRISTCHURCH MENʼS PRISON First Respondent
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND CHRISTCHURCH REGISTRY I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA ŌTAUTAHI ROHE CIV-2018-409-000212 [2018] NZHC 1457 BETWEEN AND AND AND RICHARD LYALL GENGE Applicant VISITING JUSTICE CHRISTCHURCH
More informationIN THE EMPLOYMENT COURT WELLINGTON [2015] NZEmpC 220 EMPC 247/2015. HAYDEN GRAEME AUSTING First Defendant. NICOLA MARIE GIBSON-HORNE Second Defendant
IN THE EMPLOYMENT COURT WELLINGTON IN THE MATTER OF AND IN THE MATTER BETWEEN AND AND [2015] NZEmpC 220 EMPC 247/2015 a challenge to a determination of the Employment Relations Authority of an application
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY CIV [2016] NZHC Plaintiff. AUCKLAND COUNCIL Defendant
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY CIV-2015-404-002795 [2016] NZHC 1199 BETWEEN AND ALWYNE JONES Plaintiff AUCKLAND COUNCIL Defendant Hearing: 29 February 2016 Appearances: R Pidgeon for
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY CIV JOHN CAMERON SADLER Judgment Debtor
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY CIV2006-404-4528 BETWEEN AND INSITE DESIGN & DEVELOPMENT LTD Judgment Creditor JOHN CAMERON SADLER Judgment Debtor Hearing: 25 May 2007 and 1 June 2007
More informationI TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU ROHE CIV [2017] NZHC NICHOLAS DAVID WRIGHT Plaintiff
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU ROHE CIV-2015-404-2800 [2017] NZHC 2865 BETWEEN AND NICHOLAS DAVID WRIGHT Plaintiff ATTORNEY-GENERAL AS REPRESENTATIVE
More informationMINUTE (No.2) OF COLLINS J
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WELLINGTON REGISTRY I TE KQTI MATUA 0 AOTEAROA TE WHANGANUI-A-TARAROHE IN THE MATTER OF CIV-2017-485-000218 An application by HORI TURI ELKINGTON, of Wellington, trustee
More informationNew Zealand High Court Te Kōti Matua o Aotearoa Christchurch Earthquake Litigation List Report As at 30 September 2018
New Zealand High Court Te Kōti Matua o Aotearoa Christchurch Earthquake Litigation List Report As at 30 September 2018 The High Court provides this report on the operation of the Christchurch Earthquake
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY CIV [2014] NZHC 847. R T VINCENT LIMITED Plaintiff
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY CIV-2013-404-004420 [2014] NZHC 847 BETWEEN AND R T VINCENT LIMITED Plaintiff WATTS & HUGHES CONSTRUCTION LIMITED Defendant Hearing: 25 February 2014
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND CHRISTCHURCH REGISTRY CIV [2014] NZHC THE EARTHQUAKE COMMISSION First Defendant
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND CHRISTCHURCH REGISTRY CIV-2013-409-000079 [2014] NZHC 1736 BETWEEN AND JACQUELINE ELLEN WHITING AND KENNETH JAMES JONES AND RICHARD SCOTT PEEBLES Plaintiffs THE EARTHQUAKE
More informationIN THE MĀORI LAND COURT OF NEW ZEALAND TAITOKERAU DISTRICT A IN THE MATTER OF Lot 2, DP 29547
145 Taitokerau MB 4 IN THE MĀORI LAND COURT OF NEW ZEALAND TAITOKERAU DISTRICT A20170001439 UNDER Section 19, Te Ture Whenua Māori Act 1993 IN THE MATTER OF Lot 2, DP 29547 BETWEEN DIANNE DONEY, TUARI
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WELLINGTON REGISTRY CIV [2014] NZHC 251. Part 30 of the High Court Rules. ATTORNEY-GENERAL Respondent
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WELLINGTON REGISTRY CIV-2013-485-4843 [2014] NZHC 251 UNDER the Judicature Amendment Act 1972 AND UNDER BETWEEN AND Part 30 of the High Court Rules MICHAEL ANTHONY KANE,
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY CIV [2015] NZHC CHRISTOPHER MAURICE LYNCH First Defendant
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY CIV-2014-404-2845 [2015] NZHC 3202 BETWEEN AMANDA ADELE WHITE First Plaintiff ANNE LEOLINE EMILY FREEMAN Second Plaintiff AND CHRISTOPHER MAURICE LYNCH
More informationIN THE MĀORI LAND COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AOTEA DISTRICT A UNDER Rule 4.10(3), Māori Land Court Rules Applicant
2018 Chief Judge s MB 842 IN THE MĀORI LAND COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AOTEA DISTRICT A20180006300 UNDER Rule 4.10(3), Māori Land Court Rules 2011 IN THE MATTER OF BETWEEN Waitara East Section 81 B (Rohutu)
More informationIN THE MĀORI LAND COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AOTEA DISTRICT A Hearing: 364 Aotea MB dated 13 December 2016
366 Aotea MB 274 IN THE MĀORI LAND COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AOTEA DISTRICT A20160005718 UNDER Rule 4.10(3), Maori Land Court Rules 2011 IN THE MATTER OF Ruapehu 2 block and a decision of the Deputy Registrar
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND HAMILTON REGISTRY CIV [2014] NZHC 520
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND HAMILTON REGISTRY CIV-2013-419-000929 [2014] NZHC 520 BETWEEN AND JONATHAN DOUGLAS SEALEY and DIANE MICHELLE SEALEY Appellants GARY ALLAN CRAIG, JOHN LEONARD SIEPRATH,
More informationI TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TE WHANGANUI-Ā-TARA ROHE CIV [2017] NZHC 2933
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WELLINGTON REGISTRY I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TE WHANGANUI-Ā-TARA ROHE CIV-2017-485-000627 [2017] NZHC 2933 IN THE MATTER OF IN THE MATTER OF BETWEEN AND The Resource
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND HAMILTON REGISTRY CIV [2013] NZHC 576. PHILLIPA MARY WATERS Plaintiff. PERRY FOUNDATION Defendant
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND HAMILTON REGISTRY CIV-2011-419-1790 [2013] NZHC 576 BETWEEN AND PHILLIPA MARY WATERS Plaintiff PERRY FOUNDATION Defendant CIV-2011-419-1791 BETWEEN AND VALERIE JOYCE HELM
More informationIN THE MĀORI LAND COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WAIARIKI DISTRICT A
163 Waiāriki MB 10 IN THE MĀORI LAND COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WAIARIKI DISTRICT A20170001931 UNDER Section 59,Te Ture Whenua Māori Act 1993 IN THE MATTER OF BETWEEN AND Matangareka 3B Ahu Whenua Trust - orders
More informationIN THE MĀORI LAND COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AOTEA DISTRICT A RESERVED JUDGMENT OF JUDGE L R HARVEY
337 Aotea MB 131 IN THE MĀORI LAND COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AOTEA DISTRICT A20140011189 UNDER IN THE MATTER OF Section 67 of Te Ture Whenua Māori Act 1993 Mangaporou Ahu Whenua Trust Hearing 17 March 2015,
More informationI TE KŌTI PĪRA O AOTEAROA CA409/2018 [2018] NZCA 533. CAROLINE ANN SAWYER Applicant. Applicant. 29 November 2018 at pm JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND I TE KŌTI PĪRA O AOTEAROA CA409/2018 [2018] NZCA 533 BETWEEN AND CAROLINE ANN SAWYER Applicant VICE-CHANCELLOR OF VICTORIA UNIVERSITY OF WELLINGTON Respondent CA410/2018
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND CHRISTCHURCH REGISTRY CIV CLIVE JOHN COUSINS Defendant
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND CHRISTCHURCH REGISTRY CIV 2005 409 2833 BETWEEN AND AND JOSEPH ROGER HESLOP AND JENNIFER ROBERTA Plaintiff JENNIFER ROBERTA HESLOP AND LINDSAY DONALD SMITH AS TRUSTEES
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND ROTORUA REGISTRY CIV [2017] NZHC 56. JOANNE MIHINUI, MATATAHI MIHINUI, TANIA MIHINUI Appellants
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND ROTORUA REGISTRY CIV-2016-463-000181 [2017] NZHC 56 UNDER the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 IN THE MATTER BETWEEN AND of an appeal from a decision of the District Court
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND ROTORUA REGISTRY CIV MICHAEL D PALMER First Defendant
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND ROTORUA REGISTRY CIV-2004-463-825 BETWEEN AND AND CONCRETE STRUCTURES (NZ) LIMITED Plaintiff MICHAEL D PALMER First Defendant MONCUR ENGINEERING LIMITED Second Defendant
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY CIV [2016] NZHC UNDER t h e Defamation Act 1992 section 35
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY CIV-2015-092-1026 [2016] NZHC 3006 UNDER t h e Defamation Act 1992 section 35 BETWEEN M E L I S S A JEAN OPAI Plaintiff AND L A U R I E CULPAN First Defendant
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND ROTORUA REGISTRY CIV UNDER the Companies Act NZ WINDFARMS LIMITED Plaintiff
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND ROTORUA REGISTRY CIV 2008-463-566 UNDER the Companies Act 1993 BETWEEN AND NZ WINDFARMS LIMITED Plaintiff CONCRETE STRUCTURES (NZ) LIMITED Defendant Hearing: 26 March 2009
More informationJOHN CHARLES STRINGER Plaintiff. COLIN GRAEME CRAIG First Defendant
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU ROHE BETWEEN AND JOHN CHARLES STRINGER Plaintiff COLIN GRAEME CRAIG First Defendant CIV-2015-404-2524 [2018]
More informationAUTUMN TREE LIMITED Applicant. BISHOP WARDEN PROPERTY HOLDINGS LIMITED Respondent JUDGMENT OF HINTON J
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU ROHE BETWEEN AND AUTUMN TREE LIMITED Applicant CIV-2017-404-001944 [2017] NZHC 2838 BISHOP WARDEN PROPERTY
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY CIV BAVERSTOCK DEVELOPMENTS LIMITED Plaintiff
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY CIV 2009-404-004917 BETWEEN AND BAVERSTOCK DEVELOPMENTS LIMITED Plaintiff HOUSING NEW ZEALAND LIMITED Defendant Hearing: 19 November 2009 Appearances:
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY CIV [2017] NZHC 614. UNDER the Defamation Act COLIN GRAEME CRAIG Plaintiff
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY CIV-2015-404-2882 [2017] NZHC 614 UNDER the Defamation Act 1992 BETWEEN AND COLIN GRAEME CRAIG Plaintiff JACQUELINE STIEKEMA Defendant Hearing: 29 March
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WELLINGTON REGISTRY CIV [2012] NZHC THE NEW ZEALAND MĀORI COUNCIL Applicant
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WELLINGTON REGISTRY CIV 2012-485-2187 [2012] NZHC 3338 BETWEEN AND AND AND THE NEW ZEALAND MĀORI COUNCIL Applicant THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL First Respondent THE MINISTER OF
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WELLINGTON REGISTRY CIV RAB CONTRACTING LIMITED Defendant JUDGMENT OF ASSOCIATE JUDGE D.I.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WELLINGTON REGISTRY CIV-2010-485-912 BETWEEN AND REDICAN ALLWOOD LIMITED Plaintiff RAB CONTRACTING LIMITED Defendant Judgment: 9 November 2010 JUDGMENT OF ASSOCIATE JUDGE
More informationIN THE MĀORI LAND COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AOTEA DISTRICT A MOARI MARAEA BAILEY AND JULIAN TAITOKO BAILEY Applicants
322 Aotea MB 67 IN THE MĀORI LAND COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AOTEA DISTRICT A20120015823 UNDER IN THE MATTER OF Sections 18 and 231of Te Ture Whenua Māori Act 1993 Te Riri A Te Hore 2 Block BETWEEN AND MOARI
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY CIV
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY CIV 2008-404-001576 BETWEEN AND SUGULOGOVALE & SANIELO SUANIU Appellants HI-QUAL BUILDERS LIMITED Respondent Hearing: 18 June 2008 Appearances: Mr S Perese
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND CHRISTCHURCH REGISTRY CIV [2015] NZHC JAMON CONSTRUCTION LIMITED Plaintiff
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND CHRISTCHURCH REGISTRY CIV-2015-409-000320 [2015] NZHC 1926 BETWEEN AND JAMON CONSTRUCTION LIMITED Plaintiff BRICON ASBESTOS LIMITED Defendant Hearing: 4 August 2015 Appearances:
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND ROTORUA REGISTRY CIV [2012] NZHC 982 JUDGMENT OF DUFFY J
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND ROTORUA REGISTRY CIV-2011-404-001590 [2012] NZHC 982 UNDER the District Courts Act 1947 BETWEEN AND MJN MCNAUGHTON LIMITED Appellant RICHARD JAMES THODE Respondent Hearing:
More informationIN THE WEATHERTIGHT HOMES TRIBUNAL TRI [2017] NZWHT AUCKLAND 2. MARCO EDWARDES AND CHARLOTTE RONA EDWARDES Claimant
IN THE WEATHERTIGHT HOMES TRIBUNAL TRI-2016-100-0006 [2017] NZWHT AUCKL 2 BETWEEN MARCO EDWARDES CHARLOTTE RONA EDWARDES Claimant ARCHITECTURAL EDGE LIMITED First Respondent (Removed) SALLY BROWN SMITH
More informationIN THE MĀORI APPELLATE COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AOTEA DISTRICT A PHILIP DEAN TAUEKI Appellant. HOROWHENUA SAILING CLUB First Respondent
2014 Maori Appellate Court MB 60 IN THE MĀORI APPELLATE COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AOTEA DISTRICT A20130008562 UNDER Section 58, Te Ture Whenua Māori Act 1993 IN THE MATTER OF BETWEEN AND AND AND AND Horowhenua
More informationEMPLOYMENT COURT OF NEW ZEALAND PRACTICE DIRECTIONS
EMPLOYMENT COURT OF NEW ZEALAND PRACTICE DIRECTIONS 1. Front sheets... 2 2. Applications to and communications with the Court... 3 3. Provision of copies of authorities... 4 4. Final submissions at hearing...
More informationI TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA WHANGANUI ROHE CRI [2018] NZHC 770. Appellant. THE QUEEN Respondent
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WHANGANUI REGISTRY I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA WHANGANUI ROHE CRI-2018-483-1 [2018] NZHC 770 BETWEEN AND RUBEN HAWEA Appellant THE QUEEN Respondent Hearing: 17 April 2018
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY CIV [2017] NZHC 795. CHRISTOPHER JOSEPH OʼNEILL Plaintiff
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY CIV-2016-404-2478 [2017] NZHC 795 BETWEEN AND CHRISTOPHER JOSEPH OʼNEILL Plaintiff KIT TOOGOOD, CECIL HARDING CROUCHER AND MATT AMON Defendants Hearing:
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY CIV Applicant
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEAL AUCKL REGISTRY CIV-2010-404-007637 IN THE MATTER OF Silverdale Developments Limited (2007) Limited BETWEEN CALLUM MACDONALD Applicant ROYDEN BRETT ALLNUT, DIANE PATRICIA ALLNUT
More informationIN THE EMPLOYMENT COURT AUCKLAND [2017] NZEmpC 159 EMPC 48/2016. CATHERINE STORMONT Plaintiff. PEDDLE THORP AITKEN LIMITED Defendant
IN THE EMPLOYMENT COURT AUCKLAND IN THE MATTER OF AND IN THE MATTER BETWEEN AND [2017] NZEmpC 159 EMPC 48/2016 a challenge to a determination of the Employment Relations Authority of an application for
More informationIN THE MĀORI LAND COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WAIARIKI DISTRICT A GRAEME DENNETT ON BEHALF OF THE TRUSTEES OF FAIRY SPRINGS LAND TRUST Applicant
178 Waiariki MB 24 IN THE MĀORI LAND COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WAIARIKI DISTRICT A20170003925 UNDER IN THE MATTER OF BETWEEN AND Sections 225(j) and 237, Te Ture Whenua Māori Act 1993 Rotohokahoka D North 2A
More informationIN THE MĀORI LAND COURT OF NEW ZEALAND TAIRAWHITI DISTRICT A UNDER Section 134, Te Ture Whenua Māori 1993
60 Tairawhiti MB 90 IN THE MĀORI LAND COURT OF NEW ZEALAND TAIRAWHITI DISTRICT A20120006345 UNDER Section 134, Te Ture Whenua Māori 1993 IN THE MATTER OF BETWEEN AND Awapuni 1F3 THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WELLINGTON REGISTRY CIV [2016] NZHC MALCOLM EDWARD RABSON Applicant
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WELLINGTON REGISTRY CIV-2016-485-238 [2016] NZHC 2539 UNDER IN THE MATTER OF BETWEEN AND the Judicature Amendment Act 1972 and s 27(2) of the New Zealand Bill of Rights
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY CIV CIV [2016] NZHC 814. Plaintiff
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY CIV-2015-404-00817 CIV-2015-404-02754 [2016] NZHC 814 BETWEEN AND AND AN LI TAO Plaintiff STRATA TITLE ADMINISTRATION LTD First Defendant JIGAR PANDYA
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND CHRISTCHURCH REGISTRY CIV [2016] NZHC 1465
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND CHRISTCHURCH REGISTRY CIV-2016-409-000036 [2016] NZHC 1465 BETWEEN CGES LIMITED (IN LIQUIDATION AND RECEIVERSHIP) First Plaintiff VIVIEN JUDITH MADSEN-RIES Second Plaintiff
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND TAURANGA REGISTRY CIV [2016] NZHC SEAN TANE KELLY First Defendant. M S King for Defendants
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND TAURANGA REGISTRY CIV-2016-470-000140 [2016] NZHC 2577 BETWEEN WESTERN WORK BOATS LIMITED First Plaintiff SEAWORKS LIMITED Second Plaintiff AND SEAN TANE KELLY First Defendant
More informationIN THE MĀORI LAND COURT OF NEW ZEALAND TAITOKERAU DISTRICT A A
82 Taitokerau MB 139 IN THE MĀORI LAND COURT OF NEW ZEALAND TAITOKERAU DISTRICT A20140007693 A20140007694 UNDER Sections 18(1)(a), 18(1)(c), 19(1)(a) and 24, Te Ture Whenua Maori Act 1993 IN THE MATTER
More informationIN THE EMPLOYMENT COURT WELLINGTON [2018] NZEmpC 45 EMPC 363/2017 EMPC 65/2017. IOANA CHINAN Defendant
IN THE EMPLOYMENT COURT WELLINGTON IN THE MATTER OF AND IN THE MATTER AND IN THE MATTER BETWEEN AND [2018] NZEmpC 45 EMPC 363/2017 EMPC 65/2017 a challenge to a determination of the Employment Relations
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WELLINGTON REGISTRY CIV [2016] NZHC 683. SIR EDWARD TAIHAKUREI DURIE Plaintiff
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WELLINGTON REGISTRY CIV 2016-485-217 [2016] NZHC 683 UNDER the Declaratory Judgments Act 1908 IN THE MATTER OF BETWEEN AND the Māori Community Development Act 1962 and
More informationAppellant. ALAN PAREKURA TOROHINA HARONGA First Respondent. TE AITANGA A MĀHAKI TRUST Second Respondent. WAITANGI TRIBUNAL Third Respondent
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND CA353/2015 [2016] NZCA 626 BETWEEN AND AND AND AND THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL Appellant ALAN PAREKURA TOROHINA HARONGA First Respondent TE AITANGA A MĀHAKI TRUST Second
More informationR B Stewart QC, I Rosic and S S McMullan for Appellant A R B Barker QC and J G Walton for Respondents JUDGMENT OF THE COURT REASONS OF THE COURT
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND CA28/2017 [2017] NZCA 36 BETWEEN AND CUSTOM STREET HOTEL LIMITED Appellant PLUS CONSTRUCTION NZ LIMITED First Respondent PLUS CONSTRUCTION CO LIMITED Second Respondent
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND CA95/05. MARGARET BERRYMAN Second Appellant. Hammond, Chambers and O'Regan JJ
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND CA95/05 BETWEEN AND AND KEITH HUGH NICOLAS BERRYMAN First Appellant MARGARET BERRYMAN Second Appellant THE NEW ZEALAND DEFENCE FORCE Respondent Hearing: 27 June 2006
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW ZEALAND SC 104/2017 [2017] NZSC 178
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW ZEALAND SC 104/2017 [2017] NZSC 178 BETWEEN STUDORP LIMITED First Applicant JAMES HARDIE NEW ZEALAND Second Applicant AND TRACEY JANE CRIDGE AND MARK ANTHONY UNWIN First Respondents
More informationIN THE MĀORI LAND COURT OF NEW ZEALAND TAITOKERAU DISTRICT A Allotments Parish of Manurewa
158 Taitokerau MB 248 IN THE MĀORI LAND COURT OF NEW ZEALAND TAITOKERAU DISTRICT A20160006578 UNDER IN THE MATTER OF BETWEEN AND AND Sections 18(1)(h) and 19(1)(b), Te Ture Whenua Māori Act 1993 Allotments
More informationIN THE EMPLOYMENT COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND. I TE KŌTI TAKE MAHI O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU [2019] NZEmpC 43 EMPC 281/2018.
IN THE EMPLOYMENT COURT OF NEW ZEAL AUCKL I TE KŌTI TAKE MAHI O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU [2019] NZEmpC 43 EMPC 281/2018 IN THE MATTER OF proceedings removed from the Employment Relations Authority IN THE
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND ROTORUA REGISTRY CRI [2014] NZHC PAUL ANDREW HAMPTON Appellant. NEW ZEALAND POLICE Respondent
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND ROTORUA REGISTRY CRI-2014-463-000062 [2014] NZHC 2423 PAUL ANDREW HAMPTON Appellant v Hearing: 1 October 2014 NEW ZEALAND POLICE Respondent Appearances: Rebecca Plunket
More informationIN THE EMPLOYMENT COURT AUCKLAND [2018] NZEmpC 58 EMPC 98/2017. Plaintiff. SCOTT TECHNOLOGY NZ LTD TRADING AS ROCKLABS Defendant
IN THE EMPLOYMENT COURT AUCKLAND IN THE MATTER OF AND IN THE MATTER AND IN THE MATTER BETWEEN AND [2018] NZEmpC 58 EMPC 98/2017 a challenge to a determination of the Employment Relations Authority of an
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY CIV [2016] NZHC IN THE MATTER of the Trustee Act 1956
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY CIV-2015-404-1610 [2016] NZHC 2458 IN THE MATTER of the Trustee Act 1956 AND IN THE MATTER BETWEEN AND of an application for removal of Trustees and for
More informationApplicant. LSG SKY CHEFS NEW ZEALAND LIMITED First Respondent
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND CA23/2017 [2017] NZCA 153 BETWEEN AND TERRY HAY Applicant LSG SKY CHEFS NEW ZEALAND LIMITED First Respondent SHABEENA SHAREEN NISHA Second Respondent PRI FLIGHT CATERING
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW ZEALAND SC 124/2014 [2015] NZSC 132. MINISTER OF IMMIGRATION Respondent
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW ZEALAND SC 124/2014 [2015] NZSC 132 BETWEEN JIAXI GUO First Appellant JIAMING GUO Second Appellant AND MINISTER OF IMMIGRATION Respondent Hearing: 9 July 2015 Court: Counsel:
More informationIN THE EMPLOYMENT COURT AUCKLAND [2018] NZEmpC 30 EMPC 272/2017. LANCOM TECHNOLOGY LIMITED Plaintiff. SEAN FORMAN First Defendant
IN THE EMPLOYMENT COURT AUCKLAND IN THE MATTER OF BETWEEN AND AND [2018] NZEmpC 30 EMPC 272/2017 a challenge to a determination of the Employment Relations Authority LANCOM TECHNOLOGY LIMITED Plaintiff
More informationIN THE MĀORI LAND COURT OF NEW ZEALAND TĀKITIMU DISTRICT A PETER NEE HARLAND Applicant. THE CROWN Interested Party
57 Tākitimu MB 1 IN THE MĀORI LAND COURT OF NEW ZEALAND TĀKITIMU DISTRICT A20160006109 UNDER IN THE MATTER OF BETWEEN AND AND Section 30(1)(b) of Te Ture Whenua Māori Act 1993 Mana Ahuriri Incorporated
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY CRI [2014] NZHC CHANTELL PENE NGATIKAI Appellant
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY CRI 2014-004-000413 [2014] NZHC 3294 BETWEEN AND CHANTELL PENE NGATIKAI Appellant NEW ZEALAND POLICE Respondent Hearing: 16 December 2014 Appearances:
More informationIn the Maori AppeIIate Court of New Zealand Te Waipounamu Registry
In the Maori AppeIIate Court of New Zealand Te Waipounamu Registry Appeals 1998/3-9 IN THE MATTER of an appeal by the Attorney-General AND Port Marlborough New Zealand Limited, AND Te Atiawa Manawhenua
More informationBODY CORPORATE S89906 Second Respondent. Arnold, Harrison and Rodney Hansen JJ
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND CA345/2012 [2013] NZCA 351 BETWEEN AND AND ABCDE INVESTMENTS LIMITED & ORS Appellants JOHN BERNARD VAN GOG AND KIM MARGARET VAN GOG First Respondents BODY CORPORATE
More informationIN THE MĀORI APPELLATE COURT OF NEW ZEALAND TAITOKERAU DISTRICT A Appeal 2017/3
2017 Māori Appellate Court MB 62 IN THE MĀORI APPELLATE COURT OF NEW ZEALAND TAITOKERAU DISTRICT A20170001285 Appeal 2017/3 UNDER Section 58 of Te Ture Whenua Māori Act 1993 IN THE MATTER OF BETWEEN AND
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY CIV [2015] NZHC 315 JUDGMENT OF MUIR J
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY CIV-2014-404-1076 [2015] NZHC 315 BETWEEN AND MERCEDES-BENZ FINANCIAL SERVICES NEW ZEALAND LIMITED Plaintiff DESMOND JAMES ALBERT CONWAY Defendant Hearing:
More informationTHE CHARITIES REGISTRATION BOARD Respondent. Randerson, Wild and Winkelmann JJ JUDGMENT OF THE COURT REASONS OF THE COURT. (Given by Randerson J)
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND CA308/2014 [2015] NZCA 449 BETWEEN THE FOUNDATION FOR ANTI-AGING RESEARCH First Appellant THE FOUNDATION FOR REVERSAL OF SOLID STATE HYPOTHERMIA Second Appellant AND
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND HAMILTON REGISTRY CIV TAINUI DEVELOPMENT LIMITED Plaintiff
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND HAMILTON REGISTRY CIV 2010-419-001694 IN THE MATTER OF an Application for Summary Judgment BETWEEN AND AND TAINUI DEVELOPMENT LIMITED Plaintiff RANGIMARIE TE HORANGANUI
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY CIV [2015] NZHC TEAK CONSTRUCTION LIMITED Plaintiff
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY CIV-2015-404-0828 [2015] NZHC 2312 BETWEEN AND TEAK CONSTRUCTION LIMITED Plaintiff ANDREW BRANDS LIMITED Defendant Hearing: 22 September 2015 Appearances:
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY CIV [2017] NZHC AUCKLAND COUNCIL Respondent
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY CIV-2016-404-2311 [2017] NZHC 1392 BETWEEN AND SAMSON CORPORATION LIMITED AND STERLING NOMINEES LIMITED Appellants AUCKLAND COUNCIL Respondent Hearing:
More informationGuidelines to Practice and Procedure. for. Accident Compensation Appeals. in the. District Court. ( ACA Practice Guidelines )
Guidelines to Practice and Procedure for Accident Compensation Appeals in the District Court ( ACA Practice Guidelines ) Guidelines issued by the Chief District Court Judge 1 April 2017 Introduction Pursuant
More informationIN THE MĀORI LAND COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WAIARIKI DISTRICT A TANIA MARIE CHARTERIS Applicant. CATRINA ROWE Respondent
181 Waiariki MB 108 IN THE MĀORI LAND COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WAIARIKI DISTRICT A20160001810 UNDER IN THE MATTER OF BETWEEN AND Sections 113 and 117 of Te Ture Whenua Māori Act 1993 David John Charteris (deceased)
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WELLINGTON REGISTRY CIV
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WELLINGTON REGISTRY CIV-2006-485-751 BETWEEN AND KEITH HUGH NICOLAS BERRYMAN AND MARGARET BERRYMAN Plaintiffs HER MAJESTY'S ATTORNEY- GENERAL Defendant Hearing: 20 July
More informationIN THE EMPLOYMENT COURT AUCKLAND [2016] NZEmpC 33 ARC 75/12. ROBERT WADE LEWIS Plaintiff. JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A. Defendant
IN THE EMPLOYMENT COURT AUCKLAND IN THE MATTER OF AND IN THE MATTER AND IN THE MATTER BETWEEN AND [2016] NZEmpC 33 ARC 75/12 a challenge to a determination of the Employment Relations Authority of a challenge
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY CIV [2016] NZHC Plaintiff. THE DISTRICT COURT AT AUCKLAND First Defendant
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY CIV-2016-404-000544 [2016] NZHC 2237 UNDER THE Judicature Amendment Act 1972, Section 4 BETWEEN AND KARL NUKU Plaintiff THE DISTRICT COURT AT AUCKLAND
More informationPractice Standards for Legal Aid Providers. February 2017
Practice Standards for Legal Aid Providers February 2017 Contents General Practice Standards... 3 General Principles... 4 General Responsibilities to Clients... 5 Legal Aid Funding... 5 Relations with
More informationAppellant. THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS Respondent
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND CA129/2016 [2016] NZCA 133 BETWEEN AND MICHAEL MARINO Appellant THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS Respondent Hearing: 4 April 2016 Court: Counsel:
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND CHRISTCHURCH REGISTRY CIV [2015] NZHC DAVID OWEN CREQUER Appellant
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND CHRISTCHURCH REGISTRY CIV-2015-485-000156 [2015] NZHC 1602 IN THE MATTER OF An appeal by way of case stated from the determination of the Social Security Appeal Authority
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY CIV [2014] NZHC GOLDENCOURT INVESTMENTS LIMITED First Defendant
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY CIV-2014-404-00240 [2014] NZHC 2109 BETWEEN DAMIEN MITCHELL GRANT and JOHN MICHAEL GILBERT as Liquidators of Hunter Gills Road Limited (In Liquidation)
More informationATHANASIOS KORONIADIS Appellant. BANK OF NEW ZEALAND Respondent. Cooper, Venning and Williams JJ JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND CA522/2013 [2015] NZCA 337 BETWEEN AND ATHANASIOS KORONIADIS Appellant BANK OF NEW ZEALAND Respondent Hearing: 18 June 2015 Court: Counsel: Judgment: Cooper, Venning
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND CHRISTCHURCH REGISTRY CIV [2018] NZHC 56. EARTHQUAKE COMMISSION First Defendant
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND CHRISTCHURCH REGISTRY CIV-2013-409-1273 [2018] NZHC 56 BETWEEN AND C & S KELLY PROPERTIES LIMITED Plaintiff EARTHQUAKE COMMISSION First Defendant SOUTHERN RESPONSE EARTHQUAKE
More informationIN THE MĀORI APPELLATE COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WAIARIKI DISTRICT A APPEAL 2017/1. Applicant. RUNANGA 2C2B1 AHU WHENUA TRUST Respondent
2017 Māori Appellate Court MB 150 IN THE MĀORI APPELLATE COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WAIARIKI DISTRICT A20160007140 APPEAL 2017/1 UNDER Section 58, Te Ture Whenua Māori Act 1993 IN THE MATTER OF BETWEEN AND Runanga
More informationIN THE MĀORI LAND COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WAIARIKI DISTRICT A
108 Waiariki MB 261 IN THE MĀORI LAND COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WAIARIKI DISTRICT A20130010382 UNDER IN THE MATTER BETWEEN AND Sections 18(1)(a), 67, 322 and 323 of Te Ture Whenua Māori Act 1993 Paenoa Te Akau
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND CA241/07 CA246/07 [2007] NZCA 269
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND CA241/07 CA246/07 [2007] NZCA 269 BETWEEN AND AND AND AND AND NEW ZEALAND MAORI COUNCIL First Appellant THE FEDERATION OF MAORI AUTHORITIES INCORPORATED Second Appellant
More informationI TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA WHANGĀREI-TERENGA-PARĀOA ROHE CIV [2018] NZHC FAR NORTH DISTRICT COUNCIL First Defendant
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WHANGAREI REGISTRY I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA WHANGĀREI-TERENGA-PARĀOA ROHE CIV-2017-488-62 [2018] NZHC 3170 BETWEEN AND KAREN URLICH, RANDOLPH IVAN FRANCIS URLICH and
More information