Search

found 21 results

Images for District Court; more images...

Audio, Radio New Zealand

Topics - Twelve charges laid against the former Pike River Coal chief executive Peter Whittall in relation to the 2010 disaster at the mine have been dropped. In a shock development in the Christchurch District Court today, the Crown said that after an extensive review it was "not appropriate to continue with the prosecution against Mr Whittall''. More than half of the 2.15 million KiwiSaver members are either not contributing to the retirement scheme or not saving enough to collect the $521 annual tax credit from the Government, according to the Inland Revenue Department. The number of people with dire needs on Housing New Zealand's waiting list has tripled since the Christchurch earthquakes.

Research papers, The University of Auckland Library

In September 2010 and February 2011 the Canterbury region of New Zealand was struck by two powerful earthquakes, registering magnitude 7.1 and 6.3 respectively on the Richter scale. The second earthquake was centred 10 kilometres south-east of the centre of Christchurch (the region’s capital and New Zealand’s third most populous urban area, with approximately 360,000 residents) at a depth of five kilometres. 185 people were killed, making it the second deadliest natural disaster in New Zealand’s history. (66 people were killed in the collapse of one building alone, the six-storey Canterbury Television building.) The earthquake occurred during the lunch hour, increasing the number of people killed on footpaths and in buses and cars by falling debris. In addition to the loss of life, the earthquake caused catastrophic damage to both land and buildings in Christchurch, particularly in the central business district. Many commercial and residential buildings collapsed in the tremors; others were damaged through soil liquefaction and surface flooding. Over 1,000 buildings in the central business district were eventually demolished because of safety concerns, and an estimated 70,000 people had to leave the city after the earthquakes because their homes were uninhabitable. The New Zealand Government declared a state of national emergency, which stayed in force for ten weeks. In 2014 the Government estimated that the rebuild process would cost NZ$40 billion (approximately US$27.3 billion, a cost equivalent to 17% of New Zealand’s annual GDP). Economists now estimate it could take the New Zealand economy between 50 and 100 years to recover. The earthquakes generated tens of thousands of insurance claims, both against private home insurance companies and against the New Zealand Earthquake Commission, a government-owned statutory body which provides primary natural disaster insurance to residential property owners in New Zealand. These ranged from claims for hundreds of millions of dollars concerning the local port and university to much smaller claims in respect of the thousands of residential homes damaged. Many of these insurance claims resulted in civil proceedings, caused by disputes about policy cover, the extent of the damage and the cost and/or methodology of repairs, as well as failures in communication and delays caused by the overwhelming number of claims. Disputes were complicated by the fact that the Earthquake Commission provides primary insurance cover up to a monetary cap, with any additional costs to be met by the property owner’s private insurer. Litigation funders and non-lawyer claims advocates who took a percentage of any insurance proceeds also soon became involved. These two factors increased the number of parties involved in any given claim and introduced further obstacles to resolution. Resolving these disputes both efficiently and fairly was (and remains) central to the rebuild process. This created an unprecedented challenge for the justice system in Christchurch (and New Zealand), exacerbated by the fact that the Christchurch High Court building was itself damaged in the earthquakes, with the Court having to relocate to temporary premises. (The High Court hears civil claims exceeding NZ$200,000 in value (approximately US$140,000) or those involving particularly complex issues. Most of the claims fell into this category.) This paper will examine the response of the Christchurch High Court to this extraordinary situation as a case study in innovative judging practices and from a jurisprudential perspective. In 2011, following the earthquakes, the High Court made a commitment that earthquake-related civil claims would be dealt with as swiftly as the Court's resources permitted. In May 2012, it commenced a special “Earthquake List” to manage these cases. The list (which is ongoing) seeks to streamline the trial process, resolve quickly claims with precedent value or involving acute personal hardship or large numbers of people, facilitate settlement and generally work proactively and innovatively with local lawyers, technical experts and other stakeholders. For example, the Court maintains a public list (in spreadsheet format, available online) with details of all active cases before the Court, listing the parties and their lawyers, summarising the facts and identifying the legal issues raised. It identifies cases in which issues of general importance have been or will be decided, with the expressed purpose being to assist earthquake litigants and those contemplating litigation and to facilitate communication among parties and lawyers. This paper will posit the Earthquake List as an attempt to implement innovative judging techniques to provide efficient yet just legal processes, and which can be examined from a variety of jurisprudential perspectives. One of these is as a case study in the well-established debate about the dialogic relationship between public decisions and private settlement in the rule of law. Drawing on the work of scholars such as Hazel Genn, Owen Fiss, David Luban, Carrie Menkel-Meadow and Judith Resnik, it will explore the tension between the need to develop the law through the doctrine of precedent and the need to resolve civil disputes fairly, affordably and expeditiously. It will also be informed by the presenter’s personal experience of the interplay between reported decisions and private settlement in post-earthquake Christchurch through her work mediating insurance disputes. From a methodological perspective, this research project itself gives rise to issues suitable for discussion at the Law and Society Annual Meeting. These include the challenges in empirical study of judges, working with data collected by the courts and statistical analysis of the legal process in reference to settlement. September 2015 marked the five-year anniversary of the first Christchurch earthquake. There remains widespread dissatisfaction amongst Christchurch residents with the ongoing delays in resolving claims, particularly insurers, and the rebuild process. There will continue to be challenges in Christchurch for years to come, both from as-yet unresolved claims but also because of the possibility of a new wave of claims arising from poor quality repairs. Thus, a final purpose of presenting this paper at the 2016 Meeting is to gain the benefit of other scholarly perspectives and experiences of innovative judging best practice, with a view to strengthening and improving the judicial processes in Christchurch. This Annual Meeting of the Law and Society Association in New Orleans is a particularly appropriate forum for this paper, given the recent ten year anniversary of Hurricane Katrina and the plenary session theme of “Natural and Unnatural Disasters – human crises and law’s response.” The presenter has a personal connection with this theme, as she was a Fulbright scholar from New Zealand at New York University in 2005/2006 and participated in the student volunteer cleanup effort in New Orleans following Katrina. http://www.lawandsociety.org/NewOrleans2016/docs/2016_Program.pdf

Audio, Radio New Zealand

Hon DAVID PARKER to the Minister of Finance: Does he accept the BNZ statement that New Zealand’s increasing current account is “a very clear risk for New Zealand’s credit rating with Standard and Poor’s”? SHANE ARDERN to the Minister of Finance: What reports has he received on the economy? KEVIN HAGUE to the Minister for ACC: Can she confirm that staff in ACC’s Recovery Independence Service teams receive more or less remuneration dependent on whether the proportion of people receiving weekly compensation is less or more than specified duration targets? Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE to the Minister for Economic Development: Does he stand by all his recent statements? JAMI-LEE ROSS to the Minister of Police: What actions has the Government taken against illegal street racers? Hon MARYAN STREET to the Minister of Health: Has he received any reports or correspondence regarding the Community Pharmacy Services Agreement with District Health Boards and if he has, have they caused him any concern? TIM MACINDOE to the Minister of Justice: How is the Justice sector contributing to the Government’s better public services programme? GARETH HUGHES to the Minister for Climate Change Issues: Does he agree with the statement made by the Minister for the Environment, Hon Amy Adams in Rio, that, “Money spent on fossil fuels is money that could be spent on other sustainable development priorities”, and will the Government re-allocate the $889 million for ETS credits in Budget 2012 towards sustainable projects and a green economy? MIKE SABIN to the Minister of Immigration: What reports has he received on the benefits to New Zealand of the Recognised Seasonal Employer scheme? KRIS FAAFOI to the Minister of Police: Does she stand by all the statements she made to the Law and Order Committee yesterday? NICKY WAGNER to the Minister for Courts: What recent announcements has he made regarding court services for Christchurch? DENIS O'ROURKE to the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery: Does he still believe that the best way to deal with the price increase in home rentals in Christchurch is to leave it to the market?

Audio, Radio New Zealand

Questions to Ministers 1. CHRIS AUCHINVOLE to the Minister of Commerce: What legislative and regulatory steps has he taken to help restore investor confidence in the financial markets? 2. Hon ANNETTE KING to the Minister for Social Development and Employment: Does she stand by her reported statement that it would be pre-emptive to rule anything out because the Government was still working its way through extensive recommendations by the Welfare Working Group? 3. TE URUROA FLAVELL to the Minister of Transport: Ka aha ia ki te whakapaipai ake i te āhua o ngā rori i te tuawhenua, he hapori Māori nei te nuinga o ngā tāngata ki reira, ā, e kiia nei e ētahi, he pērā aua rori ki ngā mea o ngā ao pōhara rawa atu? * Translation: What will he do to improve the conditions of roads in rural, predominately Māori communities, some of which have been described as of third world status? 4. Hon TREVOR MALLARD to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his answer to Oral Question No 1 yesterday in relation to unemployed 15 to 19-year-olds, "If we look at the household labour force survey, we see that there are 26,700 people in the 15 to 19-year-old category"? 5. TIM MACINDOE to the Minister of Health: What progress are district health boards making in providing faster cancer radiation treatment for patients? 6. GRANT ROBERTSON to the Minister of Health: Are district health boards being funded sufficiently to maintain the level of services they provided in 2010/11? 7. KEVIN HAGUE to the Minister of Labour: When will the new chief inspector for mining and additional inspectors in the planned High Hazards Unit become operational? 8. CHARLES CHAUVEL to the Minister of Justice: Does he agree with the Chief Justice that the scheme for disclosure by the defence in criminal cases contained in the Criminal Procedure (Reform and Modernisation) Bill is "inconsistent with the defendant's right to have the prosecution prove its case beyond reasonable doubt" and with the late Chief District Court Judge that punishment at sentencing for procedural non-compliance "is conceptually incoherent and therefore arbitrary"? 9. Hon TAU HENARE to the Minister for Social Development and Employment: What is the Government doing to help teen parents get ahead? 10. Hon LIANNE DALZIEL to the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery: How many letters of offer from the Crown will be sent to insured residential red zone property owners this week? 11. NIKKI KAYE to the Minister of Internal Affairs: What announcements has he made today on improving flexibility for community groups receiving grants from gaming societies? 12. DARIEN FENTON to the Minister of Labour: Does she stand by her statement about making changes to mine safety that "until the royal commission of inquiry makes its findings, we will wait accordingly"?