Search Results

1. ENV-2016-CHC-000071 Affidavit of Mr Nathan Hole [pdf, 3.9 MB]

   ...significant when assessed against the criteria in the District Plan. It was discussed that it may not be significant, but this was never tested as a resource consent was never sought. 21. In 2012 Council was served with a Notice of Proceeding and Statement of Claim filed by Forest and Bird seeking judicial review of the grant of three Certificates issued by me, acting under delegated authority from Council, on 18 December 2008 and 13 February 2009. BF\S6476S98\11 Page 6 22....

2. Taylor v Corrections [2018] NZHRRT 35 [pdf, 308 KB]

   ...Taylor on 9 March 2015 with an apology. [3] In this decision we give our reasons for finding: [3.1] The redacted information was not personal information about Mr Taylor in terms of IPP 6. It is therefore not necessary to consider the alternative defence that the information was properly withheld from Mr Taylor under PA, s 29(1)(a). [3.2] While the watermark did obscure parts of a limited number of documents, there was no consequential interference (as defined in PA, s 66) with Mr Tay...

3. Horrell v Banyan Pacific Capital Ltd [2023] NZHRRT 35 [pdf, 361 KB]

   (1) ORDER PROHIBITING PUBLICATION OF THE NAMES, ADDRESSES, OR OTHER DETAILS WHICH MIGHT LEAD TO THE IDENTIFICATION OF CANCER SOCIETY CLIENTS OR THEIR FAMILY MEMBERS, OTHER THAN PLAINTIFF WHOSE ADDRESS ONLY IS NOT TO BE PUBLISHED (2) ORDER PROHIBITING PUBLICATION OF THE NAMES, ADDRESSES, OR OTHER DETAILS WHICH MIGHT LEAD TO THE IDENTIFICATION OF NATURALWEAR CLIENTS (3) ORDER PREVENTING SEARCH OF THE TRIBUNAL FILE WITHOUT LEAVE OF THE CHAIRPERSON OR TRIBUNAL Reference No. HRRT 03

4. Cannabis Legalisation and Control Bill Exposure Draft for Referendum [pdf, 2.2 MB]

   Cannabis Legalisation and Control Bill Exposure Draft for Referendum Explanatory note General policy statement This exposure draft of the proposed Cannabis Legalisation and Control Bill (the Bill) provides a regulatory framework to legalise and control the production, possession and use of cannabis in New Zealand for people 20 years and over. The overarching objective of the regulatory regime is to reduce the harms associated with cannabis use experienced by individuals, families, whānau, an

5. [2007] NZEmpC WC 8/07 Service and Food Workers Union Inc v OCS Ltd [pdf, 73 KB]

   ...defendant can reduce the minimum paid hours of part timers employed on public holidays. [13] In addition to these questions, Mr McBride also queried whether the Court has jurisdiction to determine the claim for arrears of wages in the statement of claim and whether the union has standing in light of an expired collective agreement. [14] There are therefore five issues to be determined: 1. Does the Court have jurisdiction to hear an application for arrears of wages? 2....

6. [2011] NZEmpC 149 NZPFFU ors v NZ Fire Service Commission [pdf, 158 KB]

   ...on-call roster without first securing the agreement of the employees concerned. [2] The plaintiffs seek a declaration that the Fire Service cannot unilaterally make changes to the on-call roster. For its part, the Fire Service claims in its statement of defence that the clause in question provides it with the entitlement to place Fire Safety Officers on an on-call roster and change that roster from time to time for operational reasons. [3] In a determination 1 dated 10 Dece...

7. [2012] NZEmpC 20 White & Others v Reserve Bank of New Zealand [pdf, 148 KB]

   ...nature and of such urgency that it was in the public interest that it should be removed immediately to the Court. In this regard, the Authority correctly noted that the issues between the parties had existed for approximately 20 years, that the statement of problem had not been filed until December 2008 and it was not until April 2010 that the plaintiffs had filed their application for removal. The Authority did, however, accept that the issues involved were complex and involved p...

8. GU v TI LCRO 258 / 2010 (19 December 2011) [pdf, 129 KB]

   ...September 2009. [11] A Registrar’s review was scheduled for 9 November and the parties were requested to provide written submissions by no later than 4.00 pm on 8 November as to how the case should be progressed. [12] A pro forma Notice of Defence was filed by Mr GV’s solicitors on 2 November with advice that affidavits would be filed “shortly”. [13] On 10 November, Mr GV’s solicitors provided submissions to the Court, in which they suggested that a further Registrar’s...

9. GD & WL v RA LCRO 290/2013 (19 August 2014) [pdf, 146 KB]

   ...property was owned as tenants in common. The lawyer’s defence was that the client was adamant that the property was owned jointly and had instructed the lawyer not to obtain a title search to verify the client’s instructions. Kos J referred to a statement by Tipping J in Gilbert v Shanahan:9 [While] [s]olicitors’ duties are governed by the scope of their retainer, but it would be unreasonable and artificial to define that scope by reference only to the client’s express instr...

10. [2019] NZEnvC 038 Hawke's Bay Fish & Game Council v Hawke's Bay Regional Council [pdf, 277 KB]

    ...('RMA'). However, that decision also found that the definition of 'wetland' could be modified to some extent within the scope of the appeal. [5] Subsequent to that First Decision, expert witness conferencing occurred. A joint witness statement ('JWS') of the planning and ecology witnesses was produced, dated 17 April 2018. The court held a teleconference on 12 July 2018, to determine how proceedings might be resolved. On 17 August 2018, two memoranda of...