Search Results

1. [2020] NZEnvC 159 Upper Clutha Environmental Society Incorporated v Queenstown Lakes District Council.pdf [pdf, 2.2 MB]

   ...7(c) RMA. Carve Out is premised on a theory that those provisions have already been accounted for in the ODP zones and sub-zones to which Carve Out would apply . ... [505) ... we can infer that the various classes of Exception Zone were generally carefully crafted through the Sch 1 RMA processes for the ODP ... to deliver outcomes that ensure the appropriate protection of ONF/L relative to the land within those Exception Zones. However, the same cannot extend to what is not contempl...

2. [2021] NZEnvC 075 Ngati Paoa Trust Board v Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga [pdf, 1.3 MB]

   ...of that argument is relevant and necessary to the making of our decision. 1 Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga Act 2014, s 58(4). 6 Relevant legal framework [15] The purpose of the Act, set out in s 3, is to promote the identification, protection, preservation, and conservation of the historical and cultural heritage of New Zealand. The principles informing that purpose and which all persons performing functions and exercising powers under the Act must recognise are set out...

3. Director of Human Rights Proceedings v New Zealand Institute of Chartered Accountants [2015] NZHRRT 54 [pdf, 182 KB]

   ...9 number of standard checklists for use by the member and by the reviewer as well as some standard template letters. [41] In the Review Procedures Manual the explicitly stated purpose of a practice review is to provide quality assurance. Protection of the public interest is stated to be “fundamental”: 1.2 Purpose The primary purpose of Practice Review is to provide quality assurance in relation to activities of members in public practice. Protection of the public inter...

4. [2024] NZEnvC 082 NSK Farming Ltd v Canterbury Regional Council [pdf, 2.5 MB]

   NSK FARMING LTD v CANTERBURY REGIONAL COUNCIL IN THE ENVIRONMENT COURT AT CHRISTCHURCH I TE KŌTI TAIAO O AOTEAROA KI ŌTAUTAHI Decision No. [2024] NZEnvC 082 IN THE MATTER of an appeal under s 120 of the Resource Management Act 1991 BETWEEN NSK FARMING LIMITED (ENV-2021-CHC-000021) Appellant/ Applicant AND CANTERBURY REGIONAL COUNCIL Respondent Court: Judge L J Semple sitting alone under s 279 of the Act Hearing: In chambers at Wellington Last case event: 9

5. LCRO 181/2023 HC v QG and VO (28 February 2025) [pdf, 413 KB]

   ...The factual circumstances giving rise to each separate complaint are best considered in isolation. [12] The alleged conduct occurred in 2019-2020. All references in this decision to the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008 (the Rules) are therefore to the Rules in their numbering and form before the 2021 amendments to the Rules. I will not be footnoting the current Rule number or wording, where different. Complaint 1: Transfer of shares in [red...

6. Justice Sector Report March 2025 [pdf, 1.2 MB]

   ...adopting a nationally led, regionally supported approach to prevention. This approach recognises that most children and young people with serious and persistent offending behaviour have previously come to the attention of government agencies due to care and protection concerns. They can have multi-layered health, education and disability needs that have not been identified or met. The greater the disadvantage, the more likely they are to offend. Support and interventions to prevent offendi...

7. JG v RS LCRO 245 / 2010 (15 March 2012) [pdf, 97 KB]

   ...Committee reviewed all of the material and the comprehensive submissions provided by both parties. Having done so, it came to the view that Mr JG had breached rules 2.3 and 13.4 of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008. [28] In respect of the breach of rule 2.3 the Committee had this to say: - “[17] The Committee considered that the relentless pursuit of this matter, with complete disregard to the costs being incurred, brought the profe...

8. LCRO 184/2015 WD v YR (6 July 2017) [pdf, 171 KB]

   ...were to be achieved. (e) Lawyer failed to provide information about the services to be provided. (f) Lawyer failed to act with instructions, and with his advice. (g) Lawyer failed to communicate in a respectful manner. (h) Lawyer failed to protect and promote our interests. (i) Lawyer failed to provide information about the progress of the case. (j) Lawyer failed to provide necessary support to find another lawyer. (k) Lawyer failed to provide information as to how to pursue a c...

9. LCRO 195/2018 KW v LQ (26 June 2020) [pdf, 182 KB]

   ...even if we have to take up a loan secured by our property; we will do whatever is needed”. [13] LQ then sent a further email to YT:3 Dear YT, please see attached our services terms and conditions (retainer). Please look through this document carefully. This is not an agreement. These are the conditions under which we provide services to our clients and we must ensure under the Country A legislation that you are familiar with them before we commence our services. … [14] When...

10. LCRO 158/2015 PL v VD (21 February 2019) [pdf, 178 KB]

    ...the part of opposing counsel could have been addressed by the court. Conclusion [88] I am required to bring a fresh, independent and robust view to the complaint, the Committee’s decision and the application for review. In doing so, I have carefully and comprehensively considered all of the material that was provided to the Committee and to this Office on review, and the submissions made at the hearing. I have paid particular attention to the areas in which the applicant has s...