Search Results

1. [2017] NZEnvC 090 Pierau v Auckland Council [pdf, 2.1 MB]

   ...6 days per annum (up to two lots of three day events) outside the main centres, with no limit on the number of people attending; that there are limitations on noise and lighting, and that Rule E40.6.2 provides that there can be no more than 500 vehicle movements per day on adjacent paragraph [21] of that decision. page 14 of her EIC. Macnicol, Rebuttal, para 3.3. para 3.4. 15 roads. She gave her opinion that such activities would not be fancifuf2 , because such events had...

2. [2017] NZEnvC 090 Pierau v Auckland Council [pdf, 2.1 MB]

   ...6 days per annum (up to two lots of three day events) outside the main centres, with no limit on the number of people attending; that there are limitations on noise and lighting, and that Rule E40.6.2 provides that there can be no more than 500 vehicle movements per day on adjacent paragraph [21] of that decision. page 14 of her EIC. Macnicol, Rebuttal, para 3.3. para 3.4. 15 roads. She gave her opinion that such activities would not be fancifuf2 , because such events had...

3. [2019] NZEnvC 203 Director General of Conservation v New Zealand Transport Agency [pdf, 7.8 MB]

   BEFORE THE ENVIRONMENT COURT I MUA I TE KOOTI TAIAO O AOTEAROA Mt Messenger IN THE MATTER AND BETWEEN AND AND AND AND AND AND Decision No. [2018] NZEnvC 2 0 3 of the Resource Management Act 1991 of six appeals under s 120 and/or s 17 4 of the Act for Mount Messenger Bypass proposed State Highway 3 between Uruti and Ahititi, North Taranaki DIRECTOR-GENERAL OF CONSERVATION (ENV-2019-WLG-000003) (ENV-2019-WLG-000004) TE RONANGA O NGATI TAMA TRUST (ENV-2019-WL

4. Final-Technical-Assessment-B-Noise-and-Vibration.pdf [pdf, 29 MB]

   ...NZS 6806, with input from other specialists, to develop what I consider to be the Best Practicable Option ("BPO"). 9. Recognising that annoyance from road-traffic noise often relates to noise with specific character or from individual vehicles, I have recommended the development and then adoption of design principles to avoid or reduce these effects (and they are contained in the Cultural and Environmental Design Framework ("CEDF"),2 attached as Appendix 3 to V...

5. LCRO 191/2019 UY v FB (26 November 2020) [pdf, 266 KB]

   ...Mr UY’s perceptive analysis of the process adopted by the Complaints Service has assisted in identifying a significant and fundamental failure which, it could be expected, the Complaints Service would be alert to in the future. [125] I see negligible value for the parties in returning the matter to the Standards Committee. [126] As has been observed by the High Court, it is the task of a Review Officer when conducting a review, to look at matters “afresh”, and to bring a rob...

6. Regulatory Impact Statement: Second phase of reforms to the Anti-Money Laundering and Countering Financing of Terrorism regime [pdf, 1.6 MB]

   1 Regulatory Impact Statement: Second phase of reforms to the Anti-Money Laundering and Countering Financing of Terrorism regime Agency Disclosure Statement 1. This Regulatory Impact Statement (RIS) has been prepared by the Ministry of Justice. The RIS provides an analysis of options to enhance and extend New Zealand’s anti-money laundering and countering financing of terrorism (AML/CFT) regime. Previous decisions have limited the scope of the options considered 2

7. LCRO 170/2019 ZY v LN QC (23 April 2021) [pdf, 279 KB]

   ...his brief. He concludes with request to Ms TW to advise what is to be done with Ms ZY’s files. [142] There had been earlier problems in the relationship when Ms ZY had, on receipt of [redacted]’s decision, made accusation that Mr LN had been negligent. The problems were smoothed over, but on receipt of Ms ZY’s email of 14 December, Mr LN was emphatic that he would not continue to represent Ms ZY. I agree with the Standards Committee, that Ms ZY’s indication to Mr LN that...

8. Thomas v Ministry of Social Development [2024] NZHRRT 63 [pdf, 356 KB]

   DECISION OF TRIBUNAL1 [1] Peter Thomas is married to Lee-Ann Pikiora Hawe-Thomas (Ms Hawe). Ms Hawe was investigated by the Ministry of Social Development (MSD) regarding her entitlement to certain benefits. In the course of that investigation MSD sent letters to various third 1 This decision is to be cited as Thomas v Ministry of Social Development [2024] NZHRRT 63. IN THE HUMAN RIGHTS REVIEW TRIBUNAL [2024] NZHRRT 63 I TE TARAIPIUNARA MANA TANGATA Reference No. HRRT

9. [2018] NZEnvC 221 Giles v Auckland Council [pdf, 8.8 MB]

   /BEFORE THE ENVIRONMENT COURT I MUA I TE KOOTI TAIAO 0 AOTEAROA Court: HearIng: Appearances: INTHEMATIER AND BETWEEN AND Decision No. [2018] NZEnvC 1. 2.. ( of the Resource Management Act 1991 of an appeal pursuant to s 120 of the Act GILES & THIRD (ENV-2017-AKL-118) Appellant AUCKLAND COUNCIL Respondent Environment Judge JA Smith sitting alone pursuant to s 279 of the Act On the papers at Auckland Date of Decision: 'i 5 NOV 2il18 Date of Issue:

10. Proactive-Release-Prisoner-Voting_FINAL.pdf [pdf, 1.7 MB]

    © Crown Copyright, Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) Hon Paul Goldsmith Minister of Justice Proactive release – Prisoner Voting Date of issue: 30 April 2025 The following documents have been proactively released in accordance with Cabinet Office Circular CO (23) 4. Some information has been withheld on the basis that it would not, if requested under the Official Information Act 1982 (OIA), be released. Where that is the case, the relevant section of the