Search Results

1. OIA-109445.pdf [pdf, 2 MB]

   ...than the total number of people each year. Ethnicity information originate from Police. All of their charges have the same recorded ethnicity information. This data may differ from that provided previously due to case updates for sentence reviews or appeals. The Australian and New Zealand Standard Offence Classification (ANZSOC) is used to categorise offences into 16 divisions, within which subdivisions and groups exist. More information on ANZSOC can be obtained from: abs.gov.au/ausstats...

2. BORA Statutes Amendment Bill (No. 2) [pdf, 299 KB]

   ...assessments) stipulate that the person must be consulted about who will undertake the assessment, they must be given notice that an assessment is required and be informed of their right to refuse the assessment. Section 64 also provides a right of appeal to the District Court against decisions of the Council. JUSTICE ITEMS 13. The Crown Law Office has considered the proposed amendments to the following pieces of legislation, and advises that there are no inconsistencies with the Bill...

3. McGregor v Jensen [pdf, 76 KB]

   SUMMARY Case: McGregor v Jensen File No: TRI 2008-100-000094/ DBH 00971 Court: WHT Chair of Tribunal: PA McConnell Date of Decision: 24 July 2009 Background Due to defects in the construction of the house, damage ensued. The remedial work included a complete reclad however further work is still required to repair leaks associated with masonry block retaining walls. The claimants (Trust) alleged that the third respondent, Auckland City Council, the eighth respondent, Mr

4. 9 December 2019 Pacey Family Trust v Auckland Council [pdf, 94 KB]

   ...Lake Road Preservation Society Incorporated v Nampara Holdings Limited & Pacey Family Trust No 2 Paceys Family No. 2 Trust v Auckland Council Application For Enforcement Order pursuant to Section 316 of the Resource Management Act 1991 Appeal Against Decision Of Consent Authority pursuant to Section 120 of the Resource Management Act 1991 Court Reference: ENV-2017-AKL-000187 Court Reference: ENV-2019-AKL-000169 1. i. ii. Topic:...

5. 2021-03-09 Tom de Pelsemaeker - Summary of Evidence (dated 8 March 2021) [pdf, 144 KB]

   ...conferencing) how the plan change provisions can be further refined to better achieve the plan change’s intended outcome. In my opinion, there are four areas where further amendments could be considered: (a) Make the controlled activity pathway more appealing without creating risk of further environmental degradation. (b) Strengthen the non-complying activity pathway. (c) Make better provision, within the framework of PC7, for higher priority takes and uses of water (2nd pr...

6. CR v TN LCRO 54/2014 (23 November 2016) [pdf, 75 KB]

   ...b. Mr CR failed to advance the High Court proceedings in a timely way, failed to attend Court conferences and failed to comply with Court Orders as a result of which the proceedings were stayed by the Court on [Date]; c. On [Date] the Court of Appeal issued a decision upholding disciplinary charges against Mr CR and dismissing Mr CR’s appeal; d. One week later, Mr CR made an offer to settle the High Court proceedings; e. Mr CR failed to provide the Committee with any explanation a...

7. Brown v Otago Polytechnic and Progressive Enterprises (Recusal Application) [2014] NZHRRT 5 [pdf, 82 KB]

   ...quite clear. I will not entertain being misled by the Tribunal and Mr Dorking and allow the Tribunal to unethically strike out my legitimate claim against Otago Polytechnic. Either the Chairperson will strike out my claim, in which case I will appeal to the High Court, or the Chairperson will allocate a hearing date for the Tribunal. [9] By memorandum dated 23 October 2013 Mr Dorking for Otago Polytechnic drew attention to the fact that both the Tribunal and Otago Polytechnic had...

8. [2013] NZEmpC 166 Catering Masters NZ Ltd v Anand [pdf, 63 KB]

   ...disbursements of $109.36, and an award of interest. [3] Mr Singh, counsel for the plaintiff, submits that no costs should be awarded in relation to the Authority’s investigation as no order for costs was made by the Authority and there was no cross-appeal on this issue. In relation to the costs contribution claimed in this Court, counsel submits that the matter was simple, lasted only one day, and that although the plaintiff failed in its challenge the compensation awarded ag...

9. PA v Standards Committee LCRO 267/2014 (30 June 2015) [pdf, 68 KB]

   ...review of a decision to prosecute [35] The role of this Office, when considering a review of a decision to lay charges against a practitioner before the Lawyers and Conveyancers Disciplinary Tribunal, was the subject of comment by the Court of Appeal in Orlov v New Zealand Law Society.1 The Court accepted that “there is now oversight of the referral decision by the independent LCRO”.2 1 Orlov v New Zealand Law Society [2013] NZCA 2...

10. McAneney v Auckland Council [2011] NZWHT Auckland 63 [pdf, 141 KB]

    ...through Ms Macky that Mr Kells was at all material times the developer of the home as he was responsible for the design and building of the home as part of the three townhouse development at 21 Inkerman Street, Onehunga. [20] The Court of Appeal decision in Mt Albert Borough Council v Johnson1 is authority for the proposition that a developer owes a non- delegable duty to an intended owner of a home to properly supervise the construction of the home. Cooke J, and with whom Some...