Search Results

1. Nga Runanga EiC M Bartlett Rights and interests Amended 17 Feb 2021 [PDF, 901 KB]

   ...submission points of Ngāi Tahu ki Murihiku  Contents of the table provide a general indication of the processes and relationship with Ngāi Tahu ki Murihiku rather than detailed analysis of the substance of proposals, reports and decisions.  Appeals to council decisions and their outcomes are not addressed in the table as the focus of these summaries is Ngāi Tahu k i Murihiku interaction with the regional council during plan development and associated council assessments. Pla...

2. MLC 2019 January National Panui [pdf, 305 KB]

   ...application is made under part 4 or sections 214 or 217 of Te Ture Whenua Mäori Act 1993, with the Registrar of the Court in which the application is to be heard, or with the Chief Registrar in respect of applications to the Chief Judge, notices of appeal to the Mäori Appellate Court and any other application required to be lodged with the Chief Registrar as set out in rule 4.1(2). W W ISAAC CHIEF JUDGE, MÄORI LAND COURT / MÄORI APPELLATE COURT 32 NATIONAL PÄNUI - Kohi-Tätea / J...

3. Nga Runanga EiC M Bartlett Rights and interests Amended tracked 17 Feb 2021 [PDF, 905 KB]

   ...submission points of Ngāi Tahu ki Murihiku  Contents of the table provide a general indication of the processes and relationship with Ngāi Tahu ki Murihiku rather than detailed analysis of the substance of proposals, reports and decisions.  Appeals to council decisions and their outcomes are not addressed in the table as the focus of these summaries is Ngāi Tahu ki Murihiku interaction with the regional council during plan development and associated council assessments. Plan...

4. List of parties [pdf, 542 KB]

   EC4010_ListOfParties LIST OF PARTIES TOPIC: Master Topic: Auckland Unitary Plan Appeals Lodgement: ENV-2016-AKL-000184 Smith & Caughey Limited v Auckland Council Initiator Smith & Caughey Limited Rowan Ashton, PO Box 1296, Shortland Street, Auckland 1140 Initiator Smith & Caughey Limited Stuart Ryan, PO Box 1296, Shortland St, Auckland 1140 Respondent Auckland Council Bill Loutit, Simpson Grierson - Auckland, Private Bag 92518, Wellesley Street, DX CX10...

5. E8 Craig Jones - Event Legacy - EIC - Applicant [pdf, 7 MB]

   ...the acceptability of a destination facility (such as a cultural centre or museum extension) in legacy mode on Hobson Wharf. Certainly, from my experience in the tourism and leisure industry I believe it will have no detrimental impacts on the appeal of the waterfront and will in fact be an enhancement. 8.8 In 5.4 Ms Skidmore comments on Viaduct Harbour Holdings Limited’s (VHHL) suggestion to develop alternative public access options for the end of the proposed Hobson Wharf exte...

6. FFNZ - EiC - K L Reilly (5 Feb 2021) [pdf, 522 KB]

   ...and economic consequences. 28 118. Further we do not consider that Council has provided sufficient evidence to show that PC7’s objectives and policies better reflect Part 2 of the RMA than the existing Water Plan. 119. The Court of Appeal in RJ Davidson Family Trust v Marlborough District Council37 confirmed the importance that must be given to Part 2 of the RMA. In that case, the Court directed that the decision maker needs to determine whether the relevant plan has b...

7. OIA-105941.pdf [pdf, 3.3 MB]

   ...responsible for providing premises and administrative services to support judges who decide each case according to the law. The Ministry supports the courts of general jurisdiction (eg the High Court and the District Court), Supreme Court, Court of Appeal, as well as specialist courts and tribunals – like the Employment Court. 2 The judiciary is responsible for the work of the courts, but is supported by the Ministry of Justice, a department of the Executive government. The Secreta...

8. Waitangi Tribunal Vol 1 Kāhui Maunga Report [pdf, 7.2 MB]

   .... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 317 (b) An approach to the supreme Court . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 321 (c) Petitions and other direct appeals to the government . . . . . . . . . . 322 (7) Alleged Crown interference in the court’s processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 325 (a) Crown agents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ....

9. Pue v Kīngi - Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Maru (Taranaki) Whenua Tōpu Trust (2015) 335 Aotea MB 1 (335 AOT 1) [pdf, 389 KB]

   ...trust (whether by way of injunction or otherwise.) [32] It is trite law that trustees must adhere to their duties and any suggestion as to a lack of knowledge of such responsibilities is no defence against a claim of breach of duty. The Court of Appeal judgment Rameka v Hall underscored the relevant duties including the principal obligation of being familiar with the terms of the trust: 39 [28] The general responsibilities of responsible trustees are set out in s 223 of the Act...

10. Ngāi Tahu Ki Murihiku - EiC - Maria Bartlett - Rights and interests (5 Feb 2021) [PDF, 898 KB]

    ...submission points of Ngāi Tahu ki Murihiku  Contents of the table provide a general indication of the processes and relationship with Ngāi Tahu ki Murihiku rather than detailed analysis of the substance of proposals, reports and decisions.  Appeals to council decisions and their outcomes are not addressed in the table as the focus of these summaries is Ngāi Tahu k i Murihiku interaction with the regional council during plan development and associated council assessments. Pla...