Search Results

1. Motiti Rohe Moana Trust and Royal Forest Bird Protection Society Inc. Submissions - 27 November 2017 [pdf, 295 KB]

   ...purpose of setting FA sustainability measures, quota allocation and quota management areas. To that extent, and subject to the Court's findings regarding indigenous biodiversity, the exercise of s30(1)(d) functions to control that effect is not permitted. But RMA controls are permissible insofar as the effects go beyond biological sustainability of the aquatic environment as a resource for fishing needs, for example to effects on intrinsic values or character of a place. 30 b...

2. [2019] NZEmpC 159 Allied Investments Ltd t/a Allied Security v Cradock [pdf, 350 KB]

   ...at, or after the end of the trial period.” [26] The final words of the subsection have two potential consequences. First, although a notice of termination for the purposes of s 67B(1) must be given before the end of the trial period, it is permitted to take effect either before, at, or after the end of the trial period. [27] Second, the effect of giving such a notice prior to the end of the trial period means it will relate to a future event if the termination is to take effec...

3. [2023] NZEnvC 109 Health New Zealand v KiwiRail Holdings Limited [pdf, 897 KB]

   ...Requiring Authority within the land requirement area; and e) ensures Watercare maintains access to its assets within the land requirement area 24 hours a day, 7 days a week for maintenance, safety and operation, provided that: i. Watercare holds a permit to enter the land requirement area; and ii. Watercare staff and / or contractors provide advance notice to Train Control before entering the land requirement area. Review of Designation 33. As soon as practicable following comp...

4. National Standards Committee 2 v Tingey [2023] NZLCDT 22 (17 May 2023) [pdf, 302 KB]

   ...balance between the public interest and private rights. These are significant matters. It is one thing to accept that any person who exercises a profession may need, for the purposes of the proper regulation of that profession in the public interest, to permit some scrutiny of his private affairs; to suggest that any or all aspects of that person's private life must be subject to regulatory scrutiny is something of an entirely different order. It is apparent from this quote that it...

5. Haupini v SRCC Holdings Ltd (Application by Defendant for Costs) [2013] NZHRRT 23 [pdf, 104 KB]

   ...the Director’s decisions and the Minister, in turn, must present a copy of the report to the House of Representatives. [49] In short, it can be argued that while the Director is not exempt from adverse awards of costs, such awards must not be permitted to weaken the Director’s statutory role. He should not, by the prospect of monetary penalty, be discouraged from bringing proceedings within the purposes identified in s 92(2) of the Act. [50] Returning to the facts of the presen...

6. [2023] NZEnvC 025 Minister of Conservation v Marlborough District Council [pdf, 5.5 MB]

   ...Indigenous Biodiversity 8 – 7 The difference in approach recognises that rules in themselves will not improve the overall condition of significant natural areas; only by working with landowners can that occur. However, control through both permitted activity rules (with conditions) and discretionary activity rules for vegetation clearance is also necessary to assist in minimising the loss of ecosystems, habitats and areas with indigenous biodiversity value. Indigenous vegetation cle...

7. [2015] NZEmpC 132 Waterford Holdings Ltd v Morunga [pdf, 197 KB]

   ...on behalf of 8 I acknowledge the issues regarding this approach, as explored in Harris v The Warehouse Ltd [2014] NZEmpC 188. There, Chief Judge Colgan did not finally determine whether s 124 permitted complete remedy extinguishment, stating the issue should be considered by a full Court. As I did not, and could not, receive full argument on this issue in the present case, I consider it appropriate to follow the line of authority w...

8. Apaapa - Te Pura No 17 Block (2010) 6 Waikato Maniapoto MB 1 (6 WMN 1) [pdf, 207 KB]

   ...money, rather he had “inherited” the land via his father. Mortgages were first taken out with the Housing Corporation and Westpac in 1985 totalling $36,500.00 presumably to build a house. Since then the applicants have, for whatever reason, permitted the mortgage to increase to its current outstanding amount of $99,142.23. The evidence is that the applicants have only intermittently in recent years made mortgage repayments. Thus the applicants rely heavily upon their persona...

9. [2018] NZEmpC 88 Lorigan v Infinity Automotive Ltd [pdf, 321 KB]

   ...4 Lorigan v Infinity Automotive Ltd (No 2) [2015] NZERA Auckland 357. the scope of the Authority’s determination is relevant when determining the extent of the issues which the Court is now permitted to reconsider, as a matter of law.5 [21] Three preliminary issues were considered by the Authority. The third of these was whether Mr Lorigan had ever had an employment relationship with SDMG, and therefore whether the claim against

10. Steele v Board of Trustees of Salisbury School [2012] NZHRRT 20 [pdf, 83 KB]

    ...time Mr Steele was becoming concerned that the school, through Ms Kennedy, might not be fully aware of developments in the Family Court. Mr Steele was about to file an application to that Court for determination of the question whether he should be permitted further contact with his daughter. He was equally concerned that the school might be in communication with Mr DB Dennis of Hammonds, solicitors in Dargaville who had in earlier proceedings been appointed as Counsel for the Child....