Search Results

1. [2022] NZEnvC 245 Upper Clutha Environmental Society Incorporated v Queenstown Lakes District Council [pdf, 255 KB]

   QTN – PDP – TOPIC 18 UCESI & ORS v QLDC – SECOND INTERIM DECISION IN THE ENVIRONMENT COURT AT CHRISTCHURCH I TE KŌTI TAIAO O AOTEAROA KI ŌTAUTAHI Decision No. [2022] NZEnvC 245 IN THE MATTER of the Resource Management Act 1991 AND appeals under clause 14 of the First Schedule of the Act BETWEEN UPPER CLUTHA ENVIRONMENTAL SOCIETY INCORPORATED AND OTHERS (ENV-2018-CHC-56) (and all the appellants allocated to Topic 18) Appellants AND QUEENSTOWN LAKES DISTRICT...

2. [2022] NZACC 9 - Herbst v ACC (25 January 2022) [pdf, 195 KB]

   ...construed or interpreted and applied to the facts is a question of law … . [25] Even if the qualifying criteria are made out, the Court has an extensive discretion in the grant or refusal of leave so as to ensure proper use of scarce judicial resources. Leave is not to be granted as a matter of course. One factor in the grant of leave is the wider importance of any contended point of law … . The Appellant’s submissions [6] Ms Herbst questioned whether the District Court err...

3. Infrastructure Funding and Financing Bill Advice [pdf, 94 KB]

   ...amends the Land Transport Management Act 2003, the Local Government Act 2002, the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act 2009, the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987, the Public Works Act 1981, the Property Law Act 2007, the Resource Management Act 1991 and the Utilities Access Act 2010. Consistency of the Bill with the Bill of Rights Act Section 14: Freedom of Expression 9. Section 14 of the Bill of Rights Act affirms that everyone has the right to freedom...

4. FFNZ - R McDiarmid - SoE -19 April 2021.pdf [pdf, 82 KB]

   BEFORE THE ENVIRONMENT COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AT CHRISTCHURCH I MUA I TE KOTI TAIAO O AOTEAROA Kl OTAUTAHI IN THE MATTER AND of the Resource Management Act 1991 of a notice of motion under section 149T(2) to decide proposed Plan Change 7 (referred to the Environment Court by the Minister for the Environment under section 142(2)(b) of the Act) OTAGO REGIONAL COUNCIL (ENV-2020-CHC-127) Applicant SUMMARY STATEMENT OF EVIDENCE OF ROWENA JOAN McDIARMID ON BEHALF OF FEDERAT...

5. Taueki - Horowhenua 11 (Lake) Māori Reservation (2005) 163 Aotea MB 99 (163 AOT 99) [pdf, 1.4 MB]

   ...12,633.00 9 055.00 Thomas Waho 6,125.00 8 180.00 1 05.00 J Cunningham 3,975. 9,100.00 1 075.00 Cecilia Hurinui 14,780.00 114.00 1 54.00 [8] According to the accounts, meeting fees would cover "normal monthly meetings, regional council resource consent, district council consultations, Eco Tourism preparations, visitors to the lake, from other iwi groups, Government and local body executive groups, ministers of the Crown and the Prime Minister, schools, universities, Arbou...

6. 9 September 2019 Summerset Villages (St Johns) Limited v Auckland Council [pdf, 95 KB]

   ...consisting of 7 buildings with 344 residential units at 55-57 Ripon Cres, Meadowbank, Auckland ENV-2018-304-000116 Summerset Villages (St Johns) Limited v Auckland Council Appeal Against Decision Of Consent Authority pursuant to Section 120 of the Resource Management Act 1991 Court Reference: ENV-2018-AKL-000160 1. i. Topic: Topic Number: EC4240_NoticeOfSessionListOfParties L...

7. [2016] NZEnvC 140 South Epsom Planning Group Inc & Three Kings United Group Inc v Auckland Council [pdf, 5.4 MB]

   BEFORE THE ENVIRONMENT COURT IN THE MATTER BETWEEN AND AND Decision No. [2016] NZEnvC \ the Resource Management Act 1991 and of appeals pursuant to Clause 14 of the First Schedule of the Act SOUTH EPSOM PLANNING GROUP INCORPORATED AND THREE KINGS UNITED GROUP INCORPORATED (ENV-2016-AKL -000001) NGATI TE ATA WAIOHUA AND NGATI TAMAOHO TRUST (ENV-2015-AKL -000158) Appellants AUCKLAND COUNCIL Respondent FLETCHER RESIDENTIAL LIMITED Applicant Hearing d...

8. [2011] NZEmpC 85 Melville v Air NZ [pdf, 67 KB]

   ...covered an unsuccessful application for removal to the Court and an adjudication which ran for 12 days. I compared that with some first instance cases in the Employment Court concerning substantial litigation involving extensive application of resources, where awards of costs of $50,000 or more were made and, with one exception of a daily rate of $9,375, the others fell between $3,800 and $6,400 per day. The Tribunal’s award in Richardson equated to a rate of $11,666 per day gro...

9. [2014] NZEmpC 29 Patel v OCS Ltd [pdf, 66 KB]

   ...error made by the Authority, where it is said that the plaintiff allocated a staff member from a “critical area” to a “non-critical area” and that finding was incorrect. The defendant accepts that this was in error. Mr Reynolds, the Human Resources Manager of the defendant, who was the decision maker and who has sworn an affidavit in support of the defendant’s opposition to the application for urgency and in support of the application for a stay, says that he found that th...

10. [2021] NZEmpC 143 Fleming v Attorney-General [pdf, 189 KB]

    ...of Appeal finds that Ms Fleming is not, and never has been, an employee of the second defendant (contrary to this Court’s finding), then the issue of remedies does not arise and does not need to be dealt with. The parties’ time, energy and resources would have been wasted. So would the Court’s. [7] That segues into the issue of prejudice. The plaintiff essentially contends that deciding remedies would be a relatively straightforward exercise, occupying no more than a half...