Search Results

1. Directory of Official Information J-L [pdf, 765 KB]

   ...• leveraging the company’s core competencies by entering into long-term leasing of land for dairy and sheep and beef farming • optimising the company’s genetic capability by marketing its genetically superior sheep, beef and deer • to permit wind farming on its properties as an adjunct to its core farming business and where appropriate, for the purpose of supplying primarily its own energy needs, to develop, operate and own small scale wind turbines on its properties, whether...

2. Andrew Michael Collins - Evidence in Chief [pdf, 1.4 MB]

   ...51 and 52) in a new section 2.11 relating to the MN EMA. • Part Four (Activity-based policies and rules) of the PRCEP -A new section 12 relating to the MNEMA, including: Four new policies (MN EMA 1 to 4); and Five new rules (one for each bf permitted, controlled, restricted discretionary, discretionary and prohibited activity status). As currently drafted by Mr Lawrence, the rules require, inter alia, resource consents for any/all "taking or removal of indigenous flora or faun...

3. [2020] NZEnvC 180 The Trustees of the Motiti Rohe Moana Trust v Bay of Plenty Regional Council.pdf [pdf, 541 KB]

   ...account. He noted that the minutes of the Committee meeting on 18 February 2020 include no mention of the principles of the Treaty. He said that at a subsequent meeting of the Council's Komiti Maori on 25 February 2020, no discussion of this was permitted. He said that MRMT sought a hearing to fully review the Council's decision-making leading to the withdrawal of Plan Change 9. [17] The application is supported by Ngati Makino Heritage Trust, Te Maru o Ngati 6 Rangiwe...

4. [2024] NZEmpC 84 E tu Inc v Singh [pdf, 378 KB]

   ...“acting in support of an employer (HVF)”. employment and the policies under which he carried out his work were relevant. As the policies make clear, there is flexibility of approach as to hours worked and private use of E tū vehicles is permitted in some circumstances, as Ms Mackintosh accepted in cross-examination. The policies were not considered during the disciplinary process. [73] On the use of an E tū phone and email for non-E tū business, Mr Singh’s init...

5. Directory of Official Information 2019 J-L [pdf, 834 KB]

   ...• leveraging the company’s core competencies by entering into long-term leasing of land for dairy and sheep and beef farming • optimising the company’s genetic capability by marketing its genetically superior sheep, beef and deer • to permit wind farming on its properties as an adjunct to its core farming business and where appropriate, for the purpose of supplying primarily its own energy needs, to develop, operate and own small scale wind turbines on its properties, whether...

6. Director of Human Rights Proceedings v Crampton [2015] NZHRRT 35 [pdf, 151 KB]

   ...following remedies: (a) a declaration that the action of the defendant is an interference with the privacy of an individual: (b) an order restraining the defendant from continuing or repeating the interference, or from engaging in, or causing or permitting others to engage in, conduct of the same kind as that constituting the interference, or conduct of any similar kind specified in the order: (c) damages in accordance with section 88: (d) an order that the defendant perform any...

7. LCRO 097/2023 RQ and EP v OM (14 February 2024) [pdf, 288 KB]

   ...provide opportunity to parties to adduce fresh or new evidence at the review stage. A Review Officer must be cautious to ensure that he or she does not get cast into the role of a “first instance” determiner of the evidence. Such an approach, if permitted, would undermine the very process of review. [88] It is incumbent on a lawyer responding to a complaint to ensure that all material documentary evidence relevant to the issues raised in the complaint is provided to the NZLS. Gap...

8. Darby Trust v Auckland Council & Ors [2013] NZWHT Auckland 1 [pdf, 283 KB]

   ...contractor or project manager, Mr Allen owed non-delegable duties of care to the claimants and that he breached them. [72] The claimants particularise those breaches as follows. They state that Mr Allen was negligent in that he: (a) Caused, permitted or allowed the design of the house to be produced in a manner that lacked the information required as set out at para [25] of the claim. Page 16 (b) Failed to ensure that the contractors and subcontractors involved in t...

9. AML phase II - Business compliance impacts [pdf, 491 KB]

   ...statements or representations whatsoever concerning the report, and the reader acknowledges that it may not rely on any such statements or representations made or information contained in the report. 4. The reader agrees that, to the maximum extent permitted by law, Deloitte, its partners, principals, employees and agents exclude and disclaim all liability (including without limitation, in contract, in tort including in negligence, or under any enactment), and shall not be liable...

10. [2024] NZIACDT 17 – LB v Luv (23 May 2024) [pdf, 298 KB]

    ...refund on about 3 or 18 April 2023. [141] Turning now to cl 24(b), it requires an adviser to ensure that refund obligations can be met. The agreement required the complainant to pay $7,650 in advance of the work being performed, which she did, and permitted Ms Luv to send an invoice for the fixed fee on lodging the expression with Immigration NZ.23 At some point, possibly on 3 December 2022, Ms Luv presumably moved the funds paid in advance out of the client account and into her fi...