Search Results

1. Otago Regional Council [2021] NZEnvC 20 (s 281 Application - Willowridge Developments) [pdf, 102 KB]

   ...law [10] By s 149T(6), the s 274 route to participation will apply where, by s 149T(3)(a), the matter has been referred to the court by a notice of motion. The notice of motion filed by the ORC seeks decisions on submissions to PC8 under cl10(1) of the First Schedule. If the requisite interest exists, s 274 affords 1 Affidavit of Alison Devlin on Behalf of Willowridge Developments Limited, affirmed 12 February 2021. 2 Dated 23 December 2020. 4 Willowridge the right to be...

2. Chief Executive Expenses: 1 July 2015 to 30 June 2016 [pdf, 119 KB]

   ...30/10/2015 378.43 Staff visits Airfare Rotorua 13/11/2015 328.05 Staff visits Airfare Auckland 19/11/2015 399.75 Attend University of Auckland Conference on Culture and Leadership Airfare Auckland 29/10/2015 250.00 Conference Registration Registration 101.74 Taxis Taxis Auckland 317.05 Crown Plaza Hotel Accommodation Auckland 8/12/2015 385.40 Staff visits - cancelled Airfare Auckland -385.40 Airfare refund Airfare 29.00 Airfare service fee Airfare Service Fee 18/12/2015 505.36...

3. RX v GR LCRO 27/2014 (15 February 2017) [pdf, 89 KB]

   ...GR and his client. She appeared to accept that, from the perspective of the rules, she is a third party to whom Mr GR owes limited professional duties, including the obligation to treat other lawyers with respect and courtesy pursuant to rule 10.1. She also appeared to acknowledge that presented her with evidential difficulties that result in her complaint lacking a really firm evidential foundation. [17] In the course of considering Miss RX’s complaint the Committee considered...

4. [2022] NZEnvC 111 The Trustees of Dokad Trust and Successors v Auckland Council [pdf, 993 KB]

   ...constitute "notice in 14 Shi1tcliff v Banks Penins11la Dishict Co1111cilEnvC C17 /99, 19 February 1999. 15 Q11ee11 City Residential Ud v Patterson Co-Pattners Architects Ltd [1995) 3 NZLR 307. 16 Willet Famify Tmst vAttckland Regional Co1111cilEnvC A101/02, 3 May 2022, at [18)). 17 See e.g. Dokad submissions dated 19 March 2022 at [8)-[9) (Dokad submissions). 6 writing" under s 357D(2). 18 He maintains that it was not until the following week that notice in writing was gi...

5. A v Van Wijk (Access to File) [2019] NZHRRT 12 [pdf, 100 KB]

   ...sought: [9.1] To protect the plaintiff and the plaintiff’s family’s identity. [9.2] To protect against publication of facts without context. [10] The second and third defendants do not oppose the application on the following conditions: [10.1] If access is to be permitted, such access should be limited to the statement of claim, the statements of reply and the plaintiff’s reply to the statement of reply; and [10.2] Only the most recent versions of the statement of claim and s...

6. People with finalised charges and convicted of serious offences June 2023 [xlsx, 188 KB]

   ...total Convicted 10,886 10,307 10,710 10,846 10,502 9,807 9,439 10,003 7,976 8,735 68% 68% 69% 68% 67% 66% 64% 64% 61% 61% Other proved 1,658 1,480 1,514 1,586 1,428 1,461 1,261 1,349 1,048 1,169 10% 10% 10% 10% 9% 10% 9% 9% 8% 8% Not proved 3,261 3,211 3,250 3,442 3,513 3,490 3,866 4,189 3,798 4,185 21% 21% 21% 22% 23% 23% 26% 27% 29% 29% Other 101 109 103 124 124 118 132 196 174 188 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% Total 15,906 15,107 15,577 15,998 15,567 14,876 14,698 15,737 12,996...

7. Sell v Harris [pdf, 27 KB]

   SUMMARY Case: Sell & Anor v Harris & Ors File No: TRI 2008-101-000001/ DBH 02592 Court: WHT Adjudicator: P McConnell Date of Decision: 13 May 2009 Background The claimants filed a claim in the Tribunal for damages arising from their leaky home. In seeking an award of $285,160.88 for the loss they suffered, the claimants pursued claims against the first respondent (Mr Harris - builder), the second respondent (Auckland City Council - territorial authority), the th...

8. [2013] NZEmpC 223 Wallace & Cooper Ltd t/a Andar Holdings v Irvine [pdf, 72 KB]

   ...letter is required. The Authority ordered the plaintiff to pay the defendant $19,000 as compensation for distress and $75,000 as reimbursement of lost remuneration. The parties then agreed on a sum of $7,000 for costs. That made a total of $101,000 the plaintiff was obliged to pay the defendant. It follows that the defendant’s offer to settle for $80,000 represented a reduction of $21,000 as Mr Guest suggested. This offer was rejected by the plaintiff. [16] In the Court, the...

9. [2022] NZIACDT 11 - BU v McCarthy (18 May 2022) [pdf, 193 KB]

   ...Disciplinary Tribunal [2017] NZHC 376 at [93]. 5 Section 50. 6 Section 51(1). 7 Z v Dental Complaints Assessment Committee [2008] NZSC 55, [2009] 1 NZLR 1 at [97], [128] & [151]. 8 Z v Dental Complaints Assessment Committee, above n 7, at [97], [101]–[102] & [112]. 6 ASSESSMENT [27] The Registrar relies on cl 1 of the Code: General 1. A licensed immigration adviser must be honest, professional, diligent and respectful and conduct themselves with due care and in a...

10. [2012] NZEmpC 157 Pottinger and Nine Dot Consulting Ltd and Carew v Kelly Services (NZ) Ltd [pdf, 77 KB]

    ...entitled to a contribution to its costs, and invited the parties to agree costs if possible. They have been unable to do so, and counsel have filed memoranda in relation to the issue. 1 [2012] NZEmpC 101. [2] The proceedings involved a challenge to a determination of the Authority granting interim orders in favour of the defendant in respect of the enforceability of restraint provisions in the first and third plaintiffs’ indivi...