Search Results

1. PAUP Residential Alternative height in relation to boundary [pdf, 632 KB]

   ...Unitary Plan. The appeal filed by Ryman/RVA additionally challenged the AHIRB control in the Terrace Housing and Apartment Building (THAB) zone. [4] The Auckland Unitary Plan Independent Hearing Panel (Panel) recommended that the control have a permitted activity status in the Mixed Housing Suburban (MHS), Mixed Housing Urban (MHU) and Terrace Housing and Apartment Building (THAB) zones of the Unitary Plan. The Council rejected the Panel's recommendations in relation to the A...

2. LCRO 125/2019 AB v CD and EF (3 June 2021) [pdf, 238 KB]

   ...information is unimportant. As to those who may be allowed to represent parties to argue cases, the Courts have an inherent jurisdiction … it is not then a question of the right to practice generally … but a question concerning what is needed or may be permitted to ensure in a particular case both justice and the appearance of justice. Obviously it is a jurisdiction to be exercised with circumspection. [70] His Honour therefore declined to describe the type of information that Mr AB...

3. Safer Sooner: Strengthening New Zealand’s Family Violence Laws [pdf, 7.9 MB]

   ...be pressured by the perpetrator into not testifying in court. This can make it more difficult to successfully prosecute family violence perpetrators. Videos taken at the time of the offence are a powerful evidential tool but are not always permitted to be used in court. WHAT CHANGES ARE PROPOSED? Video interviews made by Police at the scene of a family violence incident can be used as the victim’s evidence in chief. The victim can then be cross-examined and re-examined in th...

4. [2022] NZEmpC 39 Malcolm v The Chief Executive of the Department of Corrections [pdf, 332 KB]

   ...for judicial review in the High Court. • The assertion that blind compliance with the Order amounts to discrimination, which can only be understood as meaning the Order itself is discriminatory. • The plaintiffs’ claim that the Order permits only vaccinated people to perform certain work. Although it is alleged that this is discriminatory, no particulars had been given with regard to each plaintiff. • The fact that the Court is asked to order that the plaintiffs “...

5. [2006] NZEmpC AC 54/06 Yuan Cheng International Investment Group Ltd v Buer [pdf, 92 KB]

   ...of Appeal expressed the consequences of non-compliance as follows: We are of the view that a provision as to termination of a fixed-term agreement is ineffective when s 66(2)(b) has not been satisfied. (paragraph [70]) [60] Section 66(1) permits an employee and an employer to agree that the employment will end in certain specified circumstances. Sub-section (2) provides that before they agree that it will end in those specified ways, the employer must have genuine reasons, ba...

6. [2018] NZEmpC 91 Pan Pac Forest Products Ltd v First Union [pdf, 431 KB]

   ...Sawmill and to meet the CS2 cut plan, but will not impede the operation of the Sawmill. The need for these positions may be reviewed if new technology is introduced. [12] Fourteen employees must be present to undertake the core roles which will permit the sawmill to operate in essential machine centres. Employees in the non-core roles work the CS2 centre when it operates from time to time, and otherwise work in core positions for cover, training or tidy-up work. The positions in...

7. Te Manutukutuku issue 75 [pdf, 7.6 MB]

   ...lakes or rivers), as found to still exist in residual form (at stage 1). Past barriers, including some created by the Crown, have unfairly prevented Māori from accessing water under the RMA’s first-in, first-served system for grant- ing water permits. For these and other reasons, the Tribunal found that the RMA and its allocation regime are in breach of Treaty principles. The Tribunal’s stage 2 report cov- ered both RMA and policy reforms between 2009 and 2017. A national pol- ic...

8. [2012] NZEmpC 47 TLNZ Auckland Ltd and C3 Ltd v Maritime Union of NZ and Parsloe & Ors and Jennings & 21 ors [pdf, 202 KB]

   ...parte. I considered that the fullest opportunity that could be given in the circumstances for both parties to be able to present their respective cases required a hearing to be convened that evening. In the event, it was convened at 8.00 pm to permit sufficient time for Messrs Chemis and Opie to travel from Wellington to Auckland. Background from the affidavits [9] The first plaintiff, TLNZ Auckland Limited (TLNZ), is a stevedoring company in Auckland, involved in an essentia...

9. Robinson v ACC [2012] NZACA 9 [pdf, 640 KB]

   ...any timetable that has already been put in place, the respondent is to file submissions which comply with paragraphs of 4- 6. of Part A within a further 28 days and the appellant may file submissions in reply within a further 21 days. 5. If time permits, a decision will be made on the papers, but failing this, the application or notice will be heard as a preliminary matter at the substantive hearing." The Langhorne Orders [15] The notice of appeal to the Authority under ACA 18/0...

10. Cochrane v Accident Compensation Corporation [2024] NZACC 76 [pdf, 239 KB]

    ...them have dealt with the issue of causation. Mr Cochrane relies on the opinion of Mr Finnis. On the other hand, Mr Light relies on the CAP report. [57] The Court is often asked to make decisions in the face of uncertainty. The legal approach permits robust inferences to be drawn on causation, as the Court of Appeal held in Ambros4 . However, there must be sufficient evidential foundation to support the drawing of such inference. The evidential basis must be more than conjecture,...