Search Results

1. BORA Ngāruahine Claims Settlement Bill [pdf, 274 KB]

   ...consistent with articles 14 and 27 of the International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights, which are comparable to ss 20 and 27(2) of the Bill of Rights Act. [3] Whether s 27(3) at issue 8. Clause 24(3) of the Bill excludes damages and other forms of monetary compensation as a remedy for any failure by the Crown to comply with a protocol under the Bill. 9. This clause may be seen to raise the issue of compliance with s 27(3) of the Bill of Rights Act, namely the right to bring c...

2. BORA Hineuru Claims Settlement Bill [pdf, 288 KB]

   ...articles 14 and 27 of the International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights, which are comparable to ss 20 and 27(2) of the Bill of Rights Act. [3] Whether s 27(3) at issue 8. Clauses 26(3) and 30 of the Bill respectively exclude damages or other forms of monetary compensation as a remedy for any failure by the Crown to comply with Te Kawenata without good cause or a protocol under the Bill. 9. These clauses may be seen to raise the issue of compliance with s 27(3) of the Bill of...

3. BORA Ngāti Whātua o Kaipara Claims Settlement Bill [pdf, 289 KB]

   ...exclusion was consistent with arts 14 and 27 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which are comparable to ss 20 and 27(2) of the Bill of Rights Act.[5] Exclusion of remedy of compensation 8. Clause 29(3) excludes any form of monetary compensation as a remedy for any failure of the Crown to comply with a Culture and Heritage protocol issued under Part 2 of the Bill. It might be argued that this clause limits the right to bring civil proceedings against th...

4. BORA Te Atiawa Claims Settlement Bill [pdf, 278 KB]

   ...consistent with articles 14 and 27 of the International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights, which are comparable to ss 20 and 27(2) of the Bill of Rights Act. [3] Whether s 27(3) at issue 8. Clause 23(3) of the Bill excludes damages and other forms of monetary compensation as a remedy for any failure by the Crown to comply with a protocol under the Bill. 9. This clause may be seen to raise the issue of compliance with s 27(3) of the Bill of Rights Act, namely the right to bring c...

5. QC Ltd (in liquidation) v WD Ltd [2020] NZDT 1326 (4 August 2020) [pdf, 213 KB]

   ...QCL the sum of $800.00. As this sum if GST inclusive, QCL is requested to issue a fresh or amended invoice for GST purposes. Referee: J Robertshawe Date: 4 August 2020 CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 4 of 4 Information for Parties Rehearings You can apply for a rehearing if you believe that something prevented the proper decision from being made: for example, the relevant information was not available at the time. If you wish to apply for a r...

6. Clarken v Carling [pdf, 138 KB]

   ...turn would have directed him to observe the incorrectly executed building work. [107] Mr Probett gave evidence that the approved Plaster Systems detail for the construction of fully clad parapet and handrail walls required a sloping top to be formed and that that detail had been current for 5 years prior to the construction of the Claimants’ dwelling. Mr Probett stated that water is entering the handrail framing through the textured level top surface of the handrail and an incline...

7. Thompson v Love [pdf, 23 KB]

   ...Apron Flashing [14] Mr Love admits that the apron flashing terminated behind the exterior cladding but says that he did not install the apron flashing and that he followed proper construction practice. Mr Love says that the apron flashing forms part of the roof, which was installed by Carter Holt Harvey and that Carter Holt Harvey followed accepted trade practice at the time. Mr Love states that, at the time of construction, the apron flashings were not required to turn up at...

8. Lewis & Ors [2011] NZWHT Auckland 13 [pdf, 87 KB]

   1 [2011] NZWHT AUCKLAND 13 UNDER the Weathertight Homes Resolution Services Act 2006 IN THE MATTER of a reconsideration of the Chief Executive’s decision under section 49 CLAIM NO. 6451: NICHOLAS ROMILLY LEWIS AND DIANE HERMA LEWIS AND CHRISTOPHER ELLIOT RICHIE – 18 CAPTAIN EDWARD DANIELL DRIVE, NGAIO ELIGIBILITY DECISION OF THE CHAIR OF THE WEATHERTIGHT HOMES TRIBUNAL The Claim [1] Nicholas and Diane Lewis and Christopher Ritchi...

9. Marshall & McCardle [2011] NZWHT Auckland 5 [pdf, 89 KB]

   1 H[2011] NZWHT AUCKLAND 5 UNDER the Weathertight Homes Resolution Services Act 2006 IN THE MATTER of a reconsideration of the Chief Executive’s decision under section 49 CLAIM NO. 6401: COREY MARSHALL AND KAREN MCCARDLE – 32 MASTERTON ROAD, ROTHESAY BAY ELIGIBILITY DECISION OF THE CHAIR OF THE WEATHERTIGHT HOMES TRIBUNAL The Claim [1] Corey Marshall and Karen McCardle, as the trustees for the Marshall Family Trust, are the owners...

10. Langhorne v ACC [2010] NZACA 11 [pdf, 78 KB]

    ...treated the review application lodged under Part 9 of the 1992 Act, as coming under Part 5 of the 2001 Act. [9] This process was upheld and promoted by the Reviewer, and acquiesced to by the Case Manager, despite counsel’s repeated objections and requests to conduct the review under the correct legislation. [10] Through correspondence with Legal Services and the Wellington City branch office, ACC was put on formal notice on 28 February 2008, 4 March 2008, 4 April 2008, 18 Apr...