Search Results

1. LCRO 50/2020 M and N PQ v WR (23 April 2021) [pdf, 276 KB]

   ...Background [2] Mr and Mrs PQ were the directors and shareholders in a company [Company A]. [3] The company owned land in [district]. [4] In 2008, resource consent was obtained to subdivide the land into four allotments. Each of the allotments was permitted to accommodate a residential building, provided that each allotment retained three hectares of land for horticultural development. 2 [5] A horticultural consultant, Mr SF, was engaged to provide advice on a proposal to...

2. [2020] NZEmpC 174 Greetham v Lawter (NZ) Ltd [pdf, 384 KB]

   ...performance concerns were raised again. Mr Greetham claimed they were historic while Mr Yates maintained they were ongoing issues. Mr Greetham’s recollection of the concerns raised were that they covered the following issues: (a) air consent; (b) Permit to Work training; (c) systems maintenance; (d) an insurance error; and (e) the Hazardous Substance Location Compliance Test certificate. Mr Greetham believes he responded satisfactorily to each of these concerns. Mr Yates...

3. [2017] EmpC 153 Lorigan v Infinity Automotive Ltd [pdf, 479 KB]

   ...these documents relate to various aspects of Mr Brady’s employment. The gist of the requests is for documents supporting the proposition that Mr Brady had been given certain guarantees of employment so as to support his application for a work permit. Infinity says either that it does not have certain of the documents in its possession, custody or control, and/or that they are not relevant. However, it is now confirmed in Mr Leathley’s affidavit of documents that...

4. [2007] NZEmpC AC 26/07 Eastern Equities Corp Ltd t/a Farmers Transport Ltd v Bright [pdf, 107 KB]

   ...involving the general manager endeavouring to achieve improvements in the way that the manager of his Gisborne branch managed that branch. In dealing with a manager of Mr Bright’s seniority, some flexibility and latitude in the process may be permitted. However, if an employer adopts a less formal approach to appraisal in this way and dismissal later comes to be considered, an employer will not be regarded as having acted justifiably unless the employer has first given the emplo...

5. Heta v Ministry of Social Development [2013] NZHRRT 8 [pdf, 117 KB]

   ...her case before the Tribunal she has demonstrated a robust, practical and down to earth attitude to life. She has shown herself to be well practised in dealing with officialdom, a keen appreciator of her rights and an adept user of processes which permit her to challenge official decisions. The contention that she experienced significant humiliation, significant loss of dignity or significant injury to feelings because the Ministry did not first ask her to provide information and docum...

6. Taylor Fry feasibility report on long-term investment approach [pdf, 2 MB]

   ...valuation date. 5.7.4 Level 3: A framework for understanding return on investment Disciplined innovation Investments that aim to reduce future harm form the core of the approach. Such initiatives should be implemented in a controlled way that permits measurement of effectiveness and cost-benefit comparison. A detailed monitoring framework permits appropriate targeting of investments, plus the measurement of long term harm reduction for each intervention. The justice sector’s...

7. [2022] NZEnvC 145 Ngati Tuwharetoa Geothermal Assets Limited v Bay of Plenty Regional Council [pdf, 521 KB]

   ...reasonable costs incurred by the Bay of Plenty Regional Council when undertaking a review of this resource consent under section 128 of the Resource Management Act 1991, (as specified in condition 18.1) shall be borne by the Consent Holder. 19.0 This permit shall expire on 31st of December 2050. 20.1 The Consent Holder shall pay to the Bay of Plenty Regional Council such administrative charges as are fixed from time to time by the Regional Council in accordance with section 36 of the Res...

8. Waikato Bay of Plenty Standards Committee v Parlane [2010] NZLCDT 8 [pdf, 184 KB]

   ...inter alia: “I do have concerns however if Swarbrick Dixon cannot properly and ethically prosecute a basic $12.00 parking ticket matter and still claim to reasonably charge their client in excess of $8,000.00 then they deserve to not be permitted to practice. I will be pleased to agree to a reassignment based on a break down of communication between the complainant and myself and now give the great kiwi suggestion in relation to this file.” [97] Mr Parlane was then...

9. Appendix-5_Jonathan-Williamson_s87F-Report_Hydrogeology-and-Groundwater_28-April-2023.pdf [pdf, 607 KB]

   ...83. Their property is located immediately adjacent to one of the main off-ramp interchanges and they have a bore registered in the Council bore database. The bore is presumably being used for water for domestic purposes28 because there is no permit to take groundwater. 84. My understanding is that the bore is shallow and installed within a high permeability sand and gravel aquifer, which would make it highly susceptible to any surficial influences including machinery vibration ind...

10. LCRO 243/2013 ZAA v YBC (27 June 2017) [pdf, 267 KB]

    ...54 Letter from YBC to Lawyers Complaints Service (1 May 2013). 55 Above n 47. 17 [73] In circumstances where a lawyer determines that the prohibition in rule 6.1 does not apply, then rule 6.1.1 must be complied with before the lawyer is permitted to act for the clients concerned. The important pre-requisite to the permission in that rule that a lawyer may act for more than one party in respect of the same transaction or matter is that “the prior informed consent of all par...