Search Results

1. [2017] NZEnvC 207 Auckland Council [pdf, 734 KB]

   ...potential cost of posting notices to all potentially affected persons. [3] I note the following details of the application for consent from the affidavit of Katja Huls, the Healthy Waters Resource Management Team Manager at Auckland Council, filed in support of the application for waiver and the executive summary of the assessment of environmental effects of the application for consent. The application for the ASNDC relates to the public stormwater network of the Auckland region. Th...

2. Jang v Tse [pdf, 92 KB]

   ...that the Council records are significantly inaccurate. There is first the obvious illogicality of the neighbour's consent by the owner of Lot 16 being given for a proposed dwelling on Lot 16. There is no correlation between the documents filed showing Mr Mo as the applicant and the title to Lot 16 which has never shown him as the owner. I cannot comment on the Council processes in relation to checking the authenticity Claim 00677.doc 14 of consents to resource appl...

3. Curtin v ACC [2012] NZACA 11 [pdf, 581 KB]

   ...under the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation, and Compensation (Review Costs and Appeals) Regulations 2002 and wrongly gave the right of appeal to the District Court, and to both parties, instead of only the applicant. [3] The appeal was initially filed with the District Court, but was transferred to the> .. __ -. Authority for determination. There is no appeal against the costs award by appellant and no challenge to jurisdiction by the Corporation. The Issues [4] The dispute was pr...

4. Fehling v Appleby [2014] NZHRRT 24 [pdf, 94 KB]

   ...Tribunal given in respect of the strike out application, the recusal application and the bankruptcy issue. Nevertheless, should Mr Appleby wish to apply for costs he is entitled to do so. The following timetable is to apply: [51.1] Mr Appleby is to file his submissions within fourteen days after the date of this decision. [51.2] Mr Fehling is to file his submissions within a further fourteen days. [51.3] The Tribunal will then determine the issue of costs on the basis of the writte...

5. AN v DH LCRO 119/2015 (23 December 2015) [pdf, 97 KB]

   ...inconsistent with TH’s evidence. Ms AN says she formed the view that, at Ms DH’s instigation, TH was lying. That cannot be the same complaint that was determined by the conduct decision on which the decision on review is founded because Ms DH filed that in June 2014. [17] At the hearing on 13 February 2014 Ms AN cross-examined Ms DH and TH, and led evidence from the paternal grandmother and stepfather. [18] The matter was adjourned part-heard from 13 February 2014 to 7 Apri...

6. IAA v Sparks [2013] NZIACDT 5 (07 February 2013) [pdf, 170 KB]

   ...Sparks’ affidavit – earlier statements [58] Mr Sparks commented on his statements made to the Authority’s investigator. [59] He said the first telephone call was on 25 January 2011, and it was unexpected. He had not had time to check his file and answered as best he could. Further, he challenges the accuracy of the record in relation to meeting Mr OBC. Mr Sparks believes he said he could have met him, and he certainly did not intend to mislead the Authority. [60] His estimate...

7. [2017] NZEmpC 30 Lumsden v Skycity Management Ltd [pdf, 222 KB]

   ...doing so I have had regard to the nature and extent of the breaches to ensure overall proportionality. Quantum [61] Ms Dunn submitted that there was little guidance in terms of the sort of quantum which might be ordered by way of penalty and filed a helpful memorandum following the hearing setting out a table of penalties imposed for breach of a s 149 settlement agreement, a copy of which is annexed to this judgment. 8 7 Borsbo...

8. Complaints Assessment Committee (CAC 403) v Licensee B [2017] NZREADT 1 [pdf, 267 KB]

   ...setting out and discussing the background facts and the evidence before us, the Tribunal has anonymised references to witnesses. The Tribunal records that an order has been made for suppression of Ms A’s name. Background facts [3] The charge was filed following the Committee’s consideration of a complaint made by Mr W, a director of the Agency at which both the defendant and Ms A worked. [4] Ms A started working at the Agency in July 2014. The terms of her employment re...

9. [2018] NZEmpC 37 Edminstin v Sanford Ltd [pdf, 396 KB]

   ...This case was not of such significance or complexity to be reclassified as 3C. Senior counsel agreed on the costs category to use during a conference covering matters for trial such as dealing with any outstanding interlocutory applications, the filing of briefs of evidence and the preparation of a bundle of documents. By that stage, counsel must have had an appreciation of the issues and the evidence that would be needed to address them. The election of 2B as the appropr...

10. LCRO 176/2016+193/2016 RQ and TS v VU [pdf, 220 KB]

    ...individual was only able to gift a maximum of $27,000 in any 12 month period without incurring gift duties. [81] Mr VU had all documents necessary to complete the gifting executed in 2008. Once 12 months had elapsed he dated the documents 2009 and filed the gift statements to complete the gifting program. Mrs RQ advises that Mr VU did not make contact with her or the other beneficiaries in 2009 to either execute the relevant documents at that time or to confirm it was in order t...