New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Registration requirements

Legal area

Court

12 Aug 2021

CONNOR v CONNOR [2021] NZHC 2096

Citation

[2021] NZHC 2096
Court

High Court

Given Thomas J's prior substantive determination and the parties' consent, and because registration by Land Information New Zealand required specific identification of the interest, the Court exercised its powers under ss 52 and 59 of the Trustee Act 1956 to grant a further vesting order vesting the specified mortgagee interest in Michael Gerard Curtis and David John Chapman as trustees of the Balena Family Trust/Balena Trust.
29 Apr 2020

ANGUS v PLUMBERS, GASFITTERS AND DRAINLAYERS BOARD [2020] NZHC 835

Citation

[2020] NZHC 835
Court

High Court

The District Court lacked jurisdiction because the Board's refusal flowed from the applicant's failure to meet the minimum standards (no pass in exam 9195) prescribed under ss30–31, and s162(3) excludes appeals against decisions relating to setting minimum standards and examinations under ss28–35; further, the application was non-compliant under s37 and, on the merits, the appellant had not obtained the required pass so rejection was lawful.
4 Jul 2019

RPM v COMMISSIONER OF POLICE [2019] NZCA 279

Citation

[2019] NZCA 279
Court

Court of Appeal

The Court held that 'following' in cl 1(1)(e) means at any time after the sentence expiry date provided the release conditions were imposed at least in part in respect of the qualifying sentence; on 14 October 2016 the appellant met that test and Parliament's manifest retrospective intention could not be defeated by reading in 'immediately'; accordingly the appellant was properly placed on the Register and the appeal is dismissed.
31 Aug 2018

ANGUS v PLUMBERS, GASFITTERS AND DRAINLAYERS BOARD [2018] NZHC 2299

Citation

[2018] NZHC 2299
Court

High Court

The District Court (and thus this Court) lacked jurisdiction because no application under s37 was before the Board and therefore no statutory decision to decline registration under s41(2) had been made; s162(1)(a) does not extend to preliminary or related administrative communications such as a letter declining to alter exam marks.
25 Sept 2015

VIVIER AND COMPANY LTD v FINANCIAL MARKETS AUTHORITY [2015] NZHC 2337

Citation

[2015] NZHC 2337
Court

High Court

The FMA erred in law by making factual findings under s18A without satisfactory evidence and by breaching natural justice by failing to disclose the complaint/news article and by not providing adequate particulars and further information; consequently the direction to deregister Vivier was quashed and the matter remitted to the FMA for reconsideration with proper evidence and process.

New Zealand Case Law

CONNOR v CONNOR [2021] NZHC 2096

ANGUS v PLUMBERS, GASFITTERS AND DRAINLAYERS BOARD [2020] NZHC 835

RPM v COMMISSIONER OF POLICE [2019] NZCA 279

ANGUS v PLUMBERS, GASFITTERS AND DRAINLAYERS BOARD [2018] NZHC 2299

VIVIER AND COMPANY LTD v FINANCIAL MARKETS AUTHORITY [2015] NZHC 2337