The judiciary of New Zealand is a system of courts that interprets and applies the laws of New Zealand, to ensure equal justice under law, and to provide a mechanism for dispute resolution.
 The judiciary has four levels: the six-member Supreme Court is the highest court; the ten-member Court of Appeal hears appeals from the High Court on points of law; the High Court deals with serious criminal offences and civil matters, and hears appeals from the lower courts; and the District Court, which meets in fifty-eight locations.
 There is also a separate Māori Land Court and Māori Appellate Court which have jurisdiction over Māori land cases under the "Te Ture Whenua Maori Act 1993".
Estoppel is a collective name given to a group of legal doctrines in common law legal systems whereby a person is prevented from making assertions that are contradictory to his or her prior position on certain matters before the court—the person is said to be "estopped".
 Estoppel may operate by way of preventing someone from asserting a particular fact in court, or exercising a certain right, or bringing a particular claim. "
Black's Law Dictionary" defines estoppel as a "bar or impediment raised by the law, which precludes a man from alleging or from denying a certain fact or state of facts, in consequence of his previous allegation or denial or conduct or admission, or in consequence of a final adjudication of the matter in a court of law".
The judiciary of Pakistan is a hierarchical system with two classes of courts: the superior (or higher) judiciary and the subordinate (or lower) judiciary.
 The superior judiciary is composed of the Supreme Court of Pakistan, the Federal Shariat Court and five High Courts, with the Supreme Court at the apex.
 There is a High Court for each of the four provinces as well as a High Court for the Islamabad Capital Territory.
 The Constitution of Pakistan entrusts the superior judiciary with the obligation to preserve, protect and defend the constitution.
 Neither the Supreme Court nor a High Court may exercise jurisdiction in relation to Tribal Areas, except otherwise provided for.
 The disputed regions of Azad Kashmir and Gilgit–Baltistan have separate court systems.
In law, a dispositive motion is a motion seeking a trial court order entirely disposing of all or part of the claims in favor of the moving party without need for further trial court proceedings.
 "To dispose" of a claim means to "decide" the claim in favor of one or another party.
 As a lawsuit may comprise numerous claims made by and against numerous parties, not every dispositive motion seeks to dispose of the entire lawsuit.
 In the U.S., the most common type of dispositive motions seeking to dispose of the entire lawsuit are those for summary judgment.
 Many U.S. state jurisdictions also provide for a "partial summary judgment" or motion for "summary adjudication of issues" which only seeks to dispose of part of a lawsuit.
 See, e.g., California Code of Civil Procedure section 437c(f)(1).
 Regardless whether the dispositive motion is for summary judgment or adjudication, the motion must be supported by declarations under oath, excerpts from depositions which are also under oath, admissions of fact by the opposing party and other discovery such as interrogatories, as well as a legal argument (points and authorities).
 The other party may respond with counter-declarations, discovery responses, and legal arguments attempting to show that these issues were "triable issues of fact."
 If there is any question as to whether there is conflict on the facts on an issue, the summary judgment or adjudication must be denied regarding that matter.
In the Matter of the Estate of Charles Kanaina, the Supreme Court of Hawaii handed down several opinions and judgments over several years regarding the estate of Charles Kanaina, who died on March 13, 1877 in Honolulu, Oahu in the Kingdom of Hawaii.
 Petitions began to be filed the day after the death in probate court and lasted until 1882.
 Many relatives came forward to petition the courts to be named as an heir.
 The final adjudication found eight individuals or family groups, largely from Moana Wahine, to be legitimate claims.
The High Court of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (), consists of the Court of Appeal and the Court of First Instance; it deals with criminal and civil cases which have risen beyond the lower courts.
 It was named the Supreme Court before 1997.
 Though previously named the Supreme Court, this Court has long been the local equivalent to the Senior Courts of England and Wales and has never been vested with the power of final adjudication.
The Judiciary of Macau is responsible for the administration of justice in Macau.
 It hears all prosecutions and civil disputes, including disputes between individuals and the government.
 It is fundamental to Macau’s legal system that members of the judiciary are independent of the executive and legislative branches of the government.
 The courts of law in Macau comprise the Court of Final Appeal and 11 other courts.
 The President of the Court of Final Appeal of the Macau Special Administrative Region is head of the judiciary.
 A bilingual court system in which Chinese, Portuguese or both can be used was put in place, in accordance with the requirement of the Basic Law.
The Government of Namibia consists of the executive, the legislative and the judiciary branches.
 The Cabinet is the executive organ of government, implementing the laws of the country.
 It consists of the President, the Prime Minister and his deputy, as well as the Ministers.
 The legislative organs of government are the National Council and the National Assembly.
 They make the laws of the country.
 The judiciary organs of government are the courts.
 The highest court of Namibia is the Supreme Court.
 There is also the High Court, and lower courts.
The judiciary of Trinidad and Tobago is a branch of the Government of Trinidad and Tobago that interprets and applies the laws of Trinidad and Tobago, to ensure equal justice under law, and to provide a mechanism for dispute resolution.
 The judiciary is a hierarchical system comprising a Supreme Court of Judicature, a Magistracy and a Family Court.
 The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court is the head of the judiciary and is appointed by the President, on the advice of the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition; the current Chief Justice is Ivor Archie.
 The Supreme Court consists of a High Court and a Court of Appeal, whilst the Magistracy consists of separate criminal and civil courts with original jurisdiction, and is led by a Chief Magistrate.
The Court of Final Appeal of Macau (Portuguese: "Tribunal de Última Instância de Macau" ; ) is the court with the final adjudication power on laws of Macau.
 Prior to 1999, the highest court was the Higher Court of Justice of Macau and prior to that the Court of Appeal of the Judiciary District of Lisbon in Portugal.

Question: The Judiciary of Macau's court with the highest final adjudication power of laws in Macau is?
Answer: Court of Final Appeal