Chief Judge’s powers – no error of law or jurisdiction in order creating roadway over Māori reservation – The Trustees of the Tauwhao Te Ngare Trust v Shaw

The Trustees of the Tauwhao Te Ngare Trust v Shaw

Māori Appellate Court [2014] Māori Appellate Court MB 394 (2014 APPEAL 394)

23 December 2014

Partially successful appeal against a decision of the Chief Judge to refuse to cancel an order creating a roadway on Rangiwaea Island unless certain conditions were met. It was not in the interests of justice for the order to be cancelled.

Download The Trustees of the Tauwhao Te Ngare Trust v Shaw here (374 KB PDF). read more

Chief Judge’s powers – determining the interests of justice – Riwai Mokena v Riwai Morgan Whānau Trust

Riwai Mokena v Riwai Morgan Whānau Trust - Estate of Tamati Mokena

Māori Land Court [2014] Chief Judge’s MB 314 (2014 CJ 314)

1 July 2014

Application to amend a succession order made in 1950 relating to the interests of Tamati Mokena dismissed. The order complained of had allowed a whāngai child to succeed to Tamati's interests, contrary to law at the time. The Chief Judge determined that it would not be in the interests of justice to amend the order. Determination of what is in the interests of justice requires consideration of the rights of the parties, the adversity suffered by each, as well as matters of policy and the intended effect of legislation.

Download Riwai Mokena v Riwai Morgan Whānau Trust - Estate of Tamati Mokena here (183 KB PDF). read more

Chief Judge’s powers – roadway order cancelled subject to conditions – The Trustees of Tauwhao Te Ngare Trust v Shaw

The Trustees of Tauwhao Te Ngare Trust v Shaw - Tauwhao Te Ngare Block

Māori Land Court [2013] Chief Judge's MB 567 (2013 CJ 567)

9 August 2013

A 1976 roadway order was cancelled subject to an alternative roadway being agreed on in order to mitigate adverse effects upon both the applicants and respondent. While errors of law had been made in the creation of the roadway order, it was in the interests of justice find a workable solution for both parties.

Download The Trustees of Tauwhao Te Ngare Trust v Shaw - Tauwhao Te Ngare Block here  (194 KB PDF). read more

Chief Judge’s powers – standard of proof, delay, indefeasibility and implied trusts – Tau v Ngā Whānau o Morven and Glenavy

Tau v Ngā Whānau o Morven and Glenavy - Waihao 903 Section IX Block

Māori Appellate Court [2010] Māori Appellate Court MB 167 (2010 APPEAL 167)

20 May 2010

Unsuccessful appeal against the decision of Deputy Chief Judge Isaac to cancel and amend succession orders made by the Court in 1971. The Appellate Court determined that the civil standard of proof is applied in decisions of the Māori Land and Appellate Courts as well as those of the Chief Judge. The Land Transfer Act and the doctrine of indefeasibility do not preclude claims that a registered proprietor holds on trust. The equitable doctrine of laches does not apply to the Chief Judge's statutory jurisdiction under s 45 of Te Ture Whenua Māori Act 1993 although delay is a relevant consideration.

Download Tau v Ngā Whānau o Morven and Glenavy - Waihao 903 Section IX Block here (267 KB PDF). read more

Chief Judge’s powers – insufficient evidence to overturn vesting orders – Ratahi v Oke

Ratahi v Oke - Rangitaiki 28B, 12B, 2B, 2A 

Māori Land Court [2009] Chief Judge's MB 410 (2009 CJ 410)

15 December 2009

Unsuccessful application to cancel succession orders made in 1961 and 1988. The applicant was unable to provide sufficient evidence for the Chief Judge to exercise powers under s 45 to revoke the orders.

Download Ratahi v Oke - Rangitaiki 28B, 12B, 2B, 2A  here  (298 KB PDF). read more

Chief Judge’s powers – powers to appoint counsel and grant Special Aid vested in Court, not in Chief Judge – Matauri X Incorporation

Matauri X Incorporation

Māori Land Court [2005] Chief Judge's MB 276 (2005 CJ 276)

30 November 2005

Applications for the appointment of counsel to act for Judge Spencer and for payment of counsel's costs dismissed for lack of jurisdiction and inappropriateness. The power to appoint counsel and to grant Special Aid is vested in the Court and not in the Chief Judge who is distinct from the Court.

Download Matauri X Incorporation here  (2.01 MB PDF). read more

Costs – costs should follow the event – Manuirirangi v Paraninihi Ki Waitotara Inc

Manuirirangi v Paraninihi Ki Waitotara Inc – Paraninihi Ki Waitotara

Māori Appellate Court (2002) 15 Aotea Appellate MB 64 (15 WGAP 64)

27 August 2002

An order that costs should lie where they fell made by the Deputy Chief Judge, exercising the Chief Judge's powers, was successfully appealed. Costs should follow the event. The Māori Land Court has a role in facilitating ongoing amicable relationships, especially where the parties are whānau to each other, which can render awards of costs inappropriate. However, the parties here were shareholders and a large, experienced and well resourced Incorporation. Fault was an irrelevant consideration.

Download Manuirirangi v Paraninihi Ki Waitotara Inc – Paraninihi Ki Waitotara here (1.7 MB PDF). read more

Chief Judge’s powers – consideration of value, adequacy and good faith – Estate of George Amos

Estate of George Amos - Horahora 1A4B, 1A4E & 1A4F Blocks

Māori Land Court [2002] Chief Judge’s MB 54 (2002 CJ 54)

5 February 2002

Application to cancel three orders confirming alienation of land from George and Jack Amos to R Green dismissed. There was no evidence that the purchaser did not act in good faith. Unless the Judge at first instance applied incorrect principles then it is not for the Chief Judge to make a determination on the adequacy of the consideration. The Chief Judge merely has to be satisfied that the transaction was for value, thereby distinguishing the transaction from a gift or a transfer of interests by way of succession. The procedural errors should have been challenged at the time they were made and not 18 years later.

Download Estate of George Amos - Horahora 1A4B, 1A4E & 1A4F Blocks here (4.25 MB PDF). read more

Chief Judge’s powers – appeal based on misunderstanding – Mann

Mann - Pakohu 2B2AJ

Māori Appellate Court (2000) 4 Taitokerau Appellate MB 234 (4 APWH 234)

11 January 2000

Appeal against a decision of the Chief Judge made under s 45 of Te Ture Whenua Māori Act 1993 dismissed. Appellants wrongly believed that the Chief Judge's decision to cancel a succession order reflected poorly on their ancestor. Other matters raised were not within the Appellate Court's jurisdiction.

Download Mann - Pakohu 2B2AJ here (5.03 MB PDF). read more

Chief Judge’s powers – principles relating to the standard of proof – Grant v Raroa

Grant v Raroa - Ngamoe A1B1B

Māori Appellate Court (1993) 33 Tairāwhiti Appellate MB 35 (33 APGS 35)

27 January 1993

Unsuccessful appeal against the exercise of the Chief Judge's powers. Those powers had been correctly exercised in cancelling an order that was made on the basis of an error in the presentation of facts. The Appellate Court sets out in detail the principles upon which the Chief Judge's powers are to be exercised.

Download Grant v Raroa - Ngamoe A1B1B here  (1019 KB PDF). read more