In on the Act: Memoirs of a Lawmaker. By SirHarold S. Kent, g.c.b., q.c., d.c.l. [London: Macmillan London Ltd.1979. iv, 267 and (Index) 6 pp. £8·95 net.] - Statute Law: Renton and the Need for Reform. Published on behalf of the Statute Law Society. [London: Sweet & Maxwell Ltd.1979. vi, 92 and (Appendices) 6 pp. £3·50 net.] - Legislative Drafting. Second edition. By G. C. Thornton, o.b.e., q.c. (Hong Kong), m.a., ll.b., Barrister and Solicitor of the Supreme Court of New Zealand, Solicitor-General, Hong Kong, formerly Chief Parliamentary Draftsman, Tanzania. [London: Butterworths. 1979. xxxiii, 340 and (Index) 10 pp. £25·00 net.]

1980 ◽  
Vol 39 (2) ◽  
pp. 399-401
Author(s):  
L. S. Sealy
1997 ◽  
Vol 46 (4) ◽  
pp. 908-918 ◽  
Author(s):  
Megan Richardson

Historically, New Zealand has indicated an ambivalent attitude to the Privy Council. The appeal has existed for New Zealand since the Supreme Court was established in 1841 and the first case on appeal was heard in 1849. But, as early as 1903, the Bench and Bar protested against the judgment of the Privy Council in Wallis v. Solicitor-General as showing ignorance of New Zealand law and social conditions.


2016 ◽  
Vol 47 (2) ◽  
pp. 227
Author(s):  
Matthew Barber

In the Supreme Court decision of Vector Gas Ltd v Bay of Plenty Energy Ltd, Tipping J put forward an approach to contact interpretation that, while indebted to that of Lord Hoffmann, was expressed differently and promoted the use of evidence of prior negotiations. Despite not gaining the support of any of the other sitting judges, this approach was swiftly taken up in the lower courts and, until recently at least, seems to have been accepted as representing New Zealand law. This article attempts a comprehensive examination of Tipping J’s approach. It concludes that, while coherent in principle, the detail of the approach is flawed in a number of ways, especially the way in which evidence of subsequent conduct is assumed to work. The future of Tipping J’s approach is considered.


2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-5
Author(s):  
Nicholas Kirk

This paper examines the development of adaptive management in New Zealand’s resource management case law. In particular, this paper investigates a Supreme Court decision (Sustain Our Sounds Inc v King Salmon New Zealand Co Ltd), which established a set of criteria for implementing adaptive management through New Zealand’s Resource Management Act. This paper describes King Salmon’s initial request for aquaculture permits, the Supreme Court appeal, and the Supreme Court’s justification for an adaptive management approach. Analyzing this justification, this paper explores the remaining constraints using an adaptive management approach to enable a more agile and flexible resource management system in New Zealand.


2010 ◽  
Vol 36 (3) ◽  
pp. 461-468
Author(s):  
Gordon Thatcher

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document