Search Results

1. [2018] NZEnvC 243 Ohau Protection Society Incorporated v Waitaki District Council [pdf, 16 MB]

   BEFORE THE ENVIRONMENT COURT I MUA I TE KOOTI TAIAO 0 AOTEAROA IN THE MATTER AND BETWEEN AND Decision No. [2018] NZEnvC 243 of the Resource Management Act 1991 of an appeal pursuant to s 120 of the Act OHAU PROTECTION SOCIETY INCORPORATED (ENV-2018-CHC-005) Appellant WAITAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL Respondent Court: Environment Judge J J M Hassan Environment Commissioner K Prime Environment Commissioner J T Baines Hearing: at Oamaru on 16 and 17 October 2018 Site visi

2. Witana v Tau - Omapere Taraire E (2019) 191 Taitokerau MB 1 (191 TTK 1) [pdf, 535 KB]

   191 Taitokerau MB 1 IN THE MĀORI LAND COURT OF NEW ZEALAND TAITOKERAU DISTRICT UNDER Sections 67, 236, 237, 239 and 240, Te Ture Whenua Māori Act 1993 IN THE MATTER OF Omapere Taraire E & Rangihamama X3A Ahu Whenua Trust BETWEEN A20180002924 RACHEL WITANA and TAOKO WIHONGI Applicants AND RANIERA SONNY TAU, TE TUHI ROBUST, BRUCE CUTFORTH and COLLEEN BERMINGHAM-BROWN Respondents A20180002884 AND BETW

3. LCRO 275/2015 and 9/2016 YM v SC and JW (18 December 2018) [pdf, 286 KB]

   ...costs. It was to the partners of [Firm 1] that Mr and Mrs SC looked for remedy, that remedy to be achieved by a refund of fees paid. [100] That view is consistent with the approach adopted by Mr and Mrs SC when first raising their concerns. [101] It was from the [Firm 1] partners (not the departed Mr JW and Mr YM) that Mr and Mrs SC sought redress. [102] It was the partners from the firm, not Mr JW or Mr YM, that responded to the concerns raised by Mr and Mrs SC. [103] The ex...

4. [2021] NZEnvC 009 Goodwin v Wellington City Council [pdf, 2.1 MB]

   ...notified.37 We will address those matters in due course but first identify two underlying legal issues arising under the public notification head. 35 Commissioner decision at [151] – [157]. 36 RMA s 95A(8)(b). 37 RMA s 95A(9)(a). 27 [101] The first arises as a result of conflicting approaches taken by the Court as to what satisfies the notification requirement. In Maungaharuru-Tangitu Trust v Hawke’s Bay Regional Council this division of the Court found that if...

5. LCRO 174/2018 GL v TE (18 June 2020) [pdf, 296 KB]

   ...the consent form.43 Mr TE [100] Mr TE explains that Mr GL’s father had concerns about Mr GL's “monetary skills”, and was “opposed” to Mr GL “having any control or management of the funds” to be resettled on the trust. [101] His position is that Ms HN refused to attend to the resettlement from Mr GL’s father’s trust because with Mr GL as sole trustee, and appointor, the trust “did not meet” his father’s “requirements” for resettlement. He says M...

6. Armfield v Naughton [2014] NZHRRT 48 [pdf, 167 KB]

   1 IN THE HUMAN RIGHTS REVIEW TRIBUNAL [2014] NZHRRT 48 Reference No. HRRT 020/2012 UNDER THE PRIVACY ACT 1993 BETWEEN KELLY ARMFIELD PLAINTIFF AND BRADLEY NAUGHTON DEFENDANT AT NEW PLYMOUTH BEFORE: Mr RPG Haines QC, Chairperson Mr GJ Cook JP, Member Mr BK Neeson, Member REPRESENTATION: Ms T Corbett and Mr L Hansen for Plaintiff (7 and 8 February 2013) Mr L Hansen for Plaintiff (15 April 2013) Mr B Naughton in person M

7. [2016] NZEmpC 158 Kidd v Beaumont [pdf, 460 KB]

   ANTHONY KIDD v GAIL ELIZABETH BEAUMONT AND ROY BEAUMONT NZEmpC AUCKLAND [2016] NZEmpC 158 [28 November 2016] IN THE EMPLOYMENT COURT AUCKLAND [2016] NZEmpC 158 EMPC 72/2016 IN THE MATTER OF a challenge to a determination of the Employment Relations Authority BETWEEN ANTHONY KIDD Plaintiff AND GAIL ELIZABETH BEAUMONT AND ROY BEAUMONT First Defendants AND GAIL ELIZABETH BEAUMONT, ROY BEAUMONT AND DIPROSE MILLER TRUSTEES LIMI

8. Bacic v Tulip Holdings Limited (in liq) [pdf, 110 KB]

   IN THE WEATHERTIGHT HOMES TRIBUNAL TRI-2008-100-000046 BETWEEN BORIS and GIORDANA BACIC Claimants AND TULIP HOLDINGS LIMITED (previously named Buildcorp Holdings Ltd) (In liquidation & removed) First Respondent AND NORTH SHORE CITY COUNCIL Second Respondent AND JAMES MICHAEL FAIRGRAY Third Respondent AND RICHARD ARTHUR ZGIERSKI- BOREYKO Fourth Respondent AND MALCOM BROWN MURRAY DAY ARCHITECTS (Removed 5 August 2008) Fifth Respondent AND SEAN LAK

9. Findlay v Auckland City Council [pdf, 108 KB]

   IN THE WEATHERTIGHT HOMES TRIBUNAL TRI 2008-100-000034 BETWEEN LEE FINDLAY AND MICHAEL ARNE SANDELIN as Trustees for LEE FINDLAY FAMILY TRUST Claimant AND AUCKLAND CITY COUNCIL First Respondent AND ROY STANLEY SLATER Second Respondent Hearing: 27, 28, 29 July 2009 and 26 August 2009 Counsel Appearances: E St John, counsel for claimants. D Heaney SC and S Mitchell, counsel for first respondent. M Frogley, counsel for second respondent. Appearanc

10. [2017] NZEmpC 39 ALA v ITE [pdf, 317 KB]

    ALA v ITE NZEmpC AUCKLAND [2017] NZEmpC 39 [12 April 2017] THERE IS AN ORDER PROHIBITING PUBLICATION OF THE NAMES OF THE PARTIES AND ANY INFORMATION LEADING TO THE PARTIES’ IDENTITY IN THE EMPLOYMENT COURT AUCKLAND [2017] NZEmpC 39 EMPC 282/2016 IN THE MATTER OF an application for orders under s 140(6) of the Employment Relations Act 2000 BETWEEN ALA Plaintiff AND ITE Defendant Hearing: 27, 28 February 2017 (heard at Taurang