Filter by:
Inquiry
Document Numbers
Date Range
to
Applied Filters:
Sort: Wai number (descending)
1.001(i)
Amendment To SOC

Amended statement of claim for Wai 762 specifically for the stage 1 homelessness phase of the inquiry, 27 Nov 20

Waimiha River Eel Fisheries (King Country) claim

18 Feb 2021
Size: 782KB
1.1.001(n)
Amendment To SOC

Thirteenth amended statement of claim of Evelyn Kereopa, 6 Mar 23

Waimiha River Eel Fisheries (King Country) claim

01 Nov 2023
Size: 689KB
2.035
SOC Amendment - Trib Memo/Direction/Decision

Memorandum-directions of the Acting Chairperson registering amended statement of claim of Evelyn Kereopa, 1 Jun 23

Waimiha River Eel Fisheries (King Country) claim

01 Nov 2023
Size: 489KB
2.21
SOC Amendment - Trib Memo/Direction/Decision

Memorandum-directions of the Deputy Chairperson registering amended Statement of Claim, 3 Aug 18

Waimiha River Eel Fisheries (King Country) claim

06 Aug 2018
Size: 342KB
1.1(e)
Amendment To SOC

Amended Statement of Claim, 29 Jun 18

Waimiha River Eel Fisheries (King Country) claim

06 Aug 2018
Size: 515KB
1.1(h)
Amendment To SOC

Amended Statement of Claim, 13 Dec 19 (Filed by D Naden / S Roughton)

Waimiha River Eel Fisheries (King Country) claim

17 Jan 2020
Size: 715KB
2.25
SOC Amendment - Trib Memo/Direction/Decision

Memorandum-directions of the Deputy Chairperson registering amended statement of claim, 16 Jan 20

Waimiha River Eel Fisheries (King Country) claim

17 Jan 2020
Size: 346KB
Wai 758
Report

The Pakakohi and Tangahoe Settlement Claims Report

Te Pakakohi Mandate and Negotiations claim

In its Pakakohi and Tangahoe Settlement Claims Report, released in November 2000, the Waitangi Tribunal found that the Crown’s decision to accept the right of Ngāti Ruanui to settle historical claims in south Taranaki on behalf of Pakakohi and Tangahoe was ‘safe’.

The Tribunal found that the claimants, the Te Runanganui o Te Pakakohi Trust Incorporation and the Te Iwi o Tangahoe Incorporation, had not demonstrated a mandate to represent Pakakohi and Tangahoe in settlement negotiations. By contrast, the Tribunal found that there was insufficient evidence that the Crown’s decision to recognise the mandate of the Ngāti Ruanui negotiating body to represent these groups was ‘unsafe’.

The two claimants groups had alleged that the Crown’s decision not to negotiate separate settlements with them was in breach of the Treaty. However, the Tribunal found that the overwhelming majority of Tangahoe and Pakakohi people supported the proposed settlement.

The claims were heard in November 2000 by the Tribunal as a matter of urgency after the Crown and Ngāti Ruanui had signalled an intention to sign a $41 million settlement that month. The Tribunal had earlier that year attempted to resolve the matter by facilitating a mediation process between the parties, but that process had been unsuccessful.

In endorsing the Crown’s mandating decisions, the Tribunal nevertheless recommended that discussions between the parties continue in order to find ways to better express the importance of the Pakakohi and Tangahoe traditions to Ngāti Ruanui in the deed of settlement.Were those traditions not factored in, said the Tribunal, a real danger would exist that ‘the Pakakohi and Tangahoe identities would be written out of Taranaki history’. That, said the Tribunal, would create a fresh grievance out of the settlement of an old one.

 

14 Nov 2000
Size: 873KB
2.009
SOC Amendment - Trib Memo/Direction/Decision

JUdge C M Wainwright, Memorandum-Directions of the acting chairperson adding named claimant to the Wai 757 claim, 22 Jul 09

Fisheries (Kaimoana Customary Fishing) Regulations 1998 claim

29 Oct 2019
Size: 110KB
1 ... 6858 6859 6860 ... 6941