Search Results

1. [2014] NZEmpC 92 H v A Ltd [pdf, 263 KB]

   ...accordingly barred by s 179(5). 15 In Alim v LSG Sky Chefs New Zealand Ltd Judge Travis declined to hear a challenge to an adjournment of proceedings by the Authority. 16 In Grant v Vice-Chancellor of the University of Otago Chief Judge Colgan permitted a challenge to an Authority determination which held that an extension period for a recommendation pursuant to s 173A of the Act had been validly granted in spite of consent not being personally obtained by the applicant. 1...

2. [2017] NZEnvC 116 The Architectural Centre v Wellington City Council [pdf, 1.2 MB]

   ...that have been identified as having no heritage value. Identified non-heritage buildings or structures will be controlled to ensure that any future modifications enhance the values of the heritage area but their demolition or relocation will be permitted. The Council's priority is to maintain the integrity of heritage areas by avoiding the loss of the features that comprise the heritage area. For this reason the demolition or removal of buildings or other features, is a Discret...

3. Whare v Trustees of Pukerewa A Trust - Pukerewa A (2015) 95 Waikato Maniapoto MB 105 (95 WMN 105) [pdf, 252 KB]

   ...If a settlement had not been achieved this would have potentially opened the Trust up to unnecessary costs to force a resolution, either through arbitration or litigation. [34] Even so, it is arguable as to whether or not grounds existed to permit a valid termination of the lease. Indeed, Minarapa Whare rejected this entirely as a solution and stressed his desire for the lease to continue and that the issues between the parties should be resolved by negotiation. Ultimately, tha...

4. Wall v The Maori Land Court - Tauhara Middle 15 Trust and Tauhara Middle 4A2A Trust [2010] 2010 Maori Appellate Court MB 55 (2010 APPEAL 55) [pdf, 175 KB]

   ...Appellate Court MB 67 nor the presence of representatives of absent persons entitled to vote. A proxy cannot vote on a show of hands unless the rules or articles, or relevant statute expressly provides otherwise. However, even when rules permit a proxy to vote on a show of hands, a member who holds a proxy for another member may exercise only one vote on a show of hands. This is on the same principle that the person exercising a vote on a show of hands must be personally pres...

5. LCRO 45 and 46/2014 PO v RQ and FE [pdf, 273 KB]

   ...had been “seriously misled” by L Ltd as the vendor of the backpacker’s business. (b) The business was non-compliant with Council regulations. Whereas Mr PO was informed that the premises could accommodate 42 beds, in fact only 32 were permitted. Mrs FE failed to advise Mr PO to ensure that the 42-bed assurance given by the vendor was included in the agreement, and also failed to advise him to seek information from the Council as to building use. (c) Alterations to the pr...

6. [2012] NZEmpC 96 South Pacific Meats Ltd v Mohammed [pdf, 238 KB]

   ...discharging any contractual obligations it had by offering him work as a general slaughterman. [59] This submission overlooks the restricted nature of Mr Mohammed’s visa. He was legally constrained as to the work he could undertake, being permitted to work specifically as a halal slaughterman. While it may have been permissible for Mr Mohammed to undertake miscellaneous non-halal related work while employed as a halal slaughterman, the terms of his work visa were unequivocal �...

7. [2023] NZEnvC 079 Royal Forest and Bird Protection Society of New Zealand Incorporated v Dunedin City Council [pdf, 456 KB]

   ...other than kānuka (Kunzea robusta and Kunzea serotina); or ii. reasonably measurable loss within the ecological district to an At Risk-Declining taxon, other than mānuka (Leptospermum scoparium); and f. does not include forfeiting rights to permitted or consented land use or development activities; and g. ensures that the delay between the loss of biodiversity through the proposal and the gain or maturation of the offset’s biodiversity outcomes is minimised. 4 Po...

8. [2024] NZEnvC 110 Evans v Marlborough District Council [pdf, 463 KB]

   ...(referred to by the applicant as the Stronvar Retirement Area) could be nested within the existing RPMP region-wide framework for pest conifers being the programme explained in Objective 5.22.1. [3] We found that a site-led programme is one of the permitted programmes able to be included within the RPMP by cl 5 of the National Policy Direction (NPD).2 [4] We further observed that the management control options included within the definition of the site-led programme encompass thos...

9. Teina Pora compensation claim quantum report [pdf, 9 MB]

   ...Pora's claim for loss of liberty (based on 21.11 years) is on the basis that he should be compensated from his arrest on 18 March 1993 to when he was released on parole. However, I accept the Crown's submission that the Guidelines do not permit compensation for loss of liberty for any period preceding conviction . Both non­ pecuniary and pecuniary losses are recoverable only in respect of the period following conviction.ll 14. Nor do the Guidelines contemplate compensation...

10. [2014] NZEmpC 92 H v A Limited [pdf, 263 KB]

    ...accordingly barred by s 179(5). 15 In Alim v LSG Sky Chefs New Zealand Ltd Judge Travis declined to hear a challenge to an adjournment of proceedings by the Authority. 16 In Grant v Vice-Chancellor of the University of Otago Chief Judge Colgan permitted a challenge to an Authority determination which held that an extension period for a recommendation pursuant to s 173A of the Act had been validly granted in spite of consent not being personally obtained by the applicant. 1...