Search Results

1. 2021-02-22 Notice of Hearing - Willowridge Developments Ltd - s 281 application [pdf, 112 KB]

   ...Baker-Galloway, Anderson Lloyd (Queenstown), PO Box 201, DX ZP95010, Queenstown Interested Party Phil Murray Resource Management Ltd Phil Murray Resource Management Ltd Interested Party Pine Terrace Ltd Nicole Dowling Interested Party Pomahaka Water Care Group Pomahaka Water Care Group Interested Party Puketoi Farming Company Ltd Puketoi Farming Company Ltd Interested Party Queenstown Lakes District Council Janette Campbell, Meredith Connell, PO Box 90750, Auckland 1142 Intere...

2. DR v BU Ltd [2022] NZDT 199 (22 November 2022) [pdf, 135 KB]

   ...information they were given after the tow. While this may have been the case, this did not negate the respondent’s right to tow the applicants’ car from private land. 9. The applicants also told the Tribunal that the respondent had a general duty of care to the public to act with integrity. However, as this is not a legal duty of care, I am unable to consider this argument. The applicants also expressed frustration at the inability to get information from the Police and the New Zeal...

3. [2025] NZSSA 05 (3 February 2025) [pdf, 149 KB]

   ...contained within the broader SNG Programme. 15. The SNG Programme provides for payments for people in specific circumstances. Clause 15 provides for re-establishment costs. The Re-establishment Grant at issue in this case is specific to refugees, protected persons, Afghan interpreters and Afghan evacuees and is established under clause 15.1 of the SNG Programme. Under clause 15.1 there are several key provisions relevant to this appeal. Clause 15.1.1 allows the Ministry to make...

4. QQ v NP LCRO 121/2012 (15 June 2015) [pdf, 78 KB]

   ...conduct under s 12(c) of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 (the Act) against him for failing to respond to Mr NP’s enquiries in a timely manner, in contravention of rule 3.2 of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008 (the rules). The Committee ordered Mr QQ to apologise to Mr NP, and to pay $950 towards the costs and expenses of the Committee’s enquiry. Background [2] Mr QQ acted on a legal aid assignment for Mr NP dated 2 August 201...

5. IR v ST LCRO 203 / 2010 (9 March 2012) [pdf, 190 KB]

   ...at the conclusion of the High Court appeal (unless the decision ordered otherwise). In addition, Mr IR was to execute an agreement to mortgage the property to ACZ (Mr SF’s firm) together with a Power of Attorney. A caveat was to be lodged to protect the agreement to mortgage. The purpose of this documentation was to enable ACZ to call on the undrawn portion of the new TSB loan to enable the costs of $9,000 (and any further costs) to be paid to Ms IS. [16] In addition, Ms IS was...

6. REAA v Ross [2012] NZREADT 4 [pdf, 136 KB]

   ...the incorrectly deposited monies then I certainly would of. I reiterate this was not an intentional act but merely a result of circumstances outside of my control. I would ask for your understanding in this matter and assure you I will be more careful in handing out my personal information in the future.” Further Evidence [10] In the hearing before us, usefully more detail was provided and we heard further evidence directed towards penalty. [11] Mr Morris is concerned, in...

7. Auckland Standards Committee v Hylan [2014] NZLCDT 31 [pdf, 95 KB]

   ...the late 1990s and early 2000s. [20] He gained his law degree in 2003 and has since completed post-graduate papers towards an LLM. Unfortunately in 2010 he and his wife separated and there were somewhat acrimonious proceedings relating to the care arrangements for their children. These proceedings occurred during the time that the conduct in question arose. [21] Mr Hylan has provided medical evidence from his doctor and from his counsel in the Family Court proceedings attesting...

8. LCRO 007/2017 NT YR v HV [pdf, 89 KB]

   ...Mr HV could have increased his fee beyond time/hourly rate on that basis. [38] Although the complainants wanted to make a final distribution as soon as possible, there were good reasons not to rush to that point. Mr SN referred to the statutory protection afforded to trustees by delaying 6 months before finally distributing an estate. Given the risk to the complainants in distributing the estate too quickly, although timeliness was important, there was no real urgency in the matter,9 a...

9. [2017] NZEnvC 133 Norsho Bulc v Auckland Council [pdf, 1.6 MB]

   ...is appropriate in a case involving effects on local amenity values; f) The amount sought was excessive; and g) It has limited funds . [10] The Society sought that costs not be awarded against it. [11] We have reviewed the material presented carefully and considered it in light of our substantive decision. Having completed that we remain of the view that the evolution of the proposal through the appeal process demonstrates that while the appellant/applicant was ultimately success...

10. [2019] NZEnvC 063 Ohau Protection Society Incorporated v Waitaki District Council [pdf, 3.1 MB]

    BEFORE THE ENVIRONMENT COURT I MUA I TE KOOTI TAIAO 0 AOTEAROA IN THE MATTER AND BETWEEN AND Decision No. [2019] NZEnvC 63 of the Resource Management Act 1991 of an appeal pursuant to s 120 of the Act OHAU PROTECTION SOCIETY INCORPORATED (ENV-2018-CHC-005) Appe"ant WAITAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL Respondent Court: Environment Judge J J M Hassan Hearing: In Chambers at Christchurch Date of Decision: 8 April 2019 Date of Issue: 8 April 2019 DECISION OF THE ENVIR...