Search Results

1. Martin, G N - EiC (5 Feb 2021) [pdf, 1.2 MB]

   ...reinforcing, to all parties involved, that the focus needs to be on the long-term planning framework that will sit in the LWRP, rather than unduly focusing resources into the WPPC. [71] There is a significant risk of the proposed plan change being appealed to the Environment Court if the Minister for the Environment does not call in the proposal. There are limited opportunities to mitigate this, however the messaging as for the above point is that resources are best focused on the long-te...

2. Evaluation of Legal Aid providers survey [pdf, 897 KB]

   ...practitioner 67% 33% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% Practising on your own account An employee 21% 16% 28% 21% 14% 0% 10% 20% 30% Up to 5 years 6–10 years 11–20 years 21–30 years More than 30 years 1% 4% 5% 90% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80%100% Court of Appeal / Supreme Court High Court Family Court / other District Court LEGAL AID PROVIDERS SURVEY: OCTOBER - NOVEMBER 2011 Page 22 H E A D E R – E V E N P A G E H e a d in g 2 – E v e n p a g e Fig...

3. Atkins & Ors as Trustees of the Bruce Family Trust v North Shore City Council [pdf, 284 KB]

   claim-01505.doc Claim No: 1505 Under the Weathertight Homes Resolution Services Act 2002 In the matter of an adjudication claim And Peter Bruce Frederick Atkins, Peter Bruce Frederick Atkins and John Richard Muller as trustees of The Bruce Family Trust Claimants And North Shore City Council First respondent And Grant Williams Second respondent And Jason Williams Third respondent And Grant Williams and Jason Williams and Desmond Sarjant Williams as trustee

4. [2020] NZEnvC 024 Panuku Developments Limited v Auckland Council [pdf, 1.7 MB]

   ...THE ENVIRONMENT COURT I MUA I TE KOOTI TAIAO O AOTEAROA Court: Hearing: Counsel: Date of Decision: Date of Issue: IN THE MATTER AND BETWEEN AND AND Decision No. [2020] NZEnvC 02-4- of the Resource Management Act 1991 of an appeal pursuant to s 120 of the Act PANUKU DEVELOPMENT AUCKLAND LIMITED (ENV-2018-AKL-000176) Appellant AUCKLAND COUNCIL Respondent R Peters and R Bannan R Dexter and A Modrow N Smith P Lange L Whiley s 27 4 parties Environment...

5. [2012] NZEmpC 79 Premier Events Group Ltd v Beattie [pdf, 248 KB]

   ...of Police, 15 the Court accepted that there was a continuing cause of action in respect of actions taken by the employer against the plaintiff. This included actions which were four years apart. The Court commented, relying on the Court of Appeal decision in Minister of Education v Bailey, 16 that: “it 10 CC 23/07, 19 November 2007. 11 At [6]. 12 [2002] 1 ERNZ 720. 13 At [33]. 14 At [32]. 15 [2003] 1 ER...

6. [2008] NZEmpC CC 9/08 Coffey v The Christchurch Press, a division of Fairfax NZ Ltd [pdf, 70 KB]

   ...to the effect that summary dismissal should be reserved for the most serious kinds of misconduct which go to the root of the employment contract so as to destroy it all together or to render it impossible of continuation. The Court of Appeal in Northern Distribution Union v BP Oil New Zealand Ltd [1992] 3 ERNZ 483 at 487, when referring to conduct that deeply impairs or is destructive of the basic confidence or trust that is an essential of the employment relationship, we...

7. [2006] NZEmpC CC 13/06 Angel & Anor v Fonterra Cooperative Group Ltd [pdf, 99 KB]

   ...process. The key question was whether the actions of the plaintiffs were capable of constituting serious misconduct. The Authority held that the matter was one of negligence and relied on W & H Newspapers Limited v Oram1 where the Court of Appeal held that a single act of carelessness when sufficiently serious can impair trust and confidence. [6] Having found that the employees had breached the integrity of the product safety systems the Authority held that their actions wer...

8. Leef v Leef - Panguru A47B (2015) 113 Taitokerau MB 11 (113 TTK 11) [pdf, 250 KB]

   ...the grantee. Ultimately, that involves an exercise of discretion on the part of the Court. As for the 6 Howell v Jaram – Omaio 43 Section 4 Block [2015] Māori Appellate Court MB 365 (2015 APPEAL 365). 7 Ibid at [37]. 113 Taitokerau MB 21 granting of a replacement occupation order (in favour of Robert), clearly the Court must be guided by ss 328 and 329 of the Act. [40] I set out ss 328 to 330 of the Act below:...

9. Wihone - Panguru A16 & others (2016) 123 Taitokerau MB 199 (123 TTK 199) [pdf, 447 KB]

   ...relation to non-access easements, such as in the case of the present water easement. I discussed this issue in my decision in Smith – Ohuirua No 2. 7 The approach I took in that decision was upheld by the Māori Appellate Court in the subsequent appeal. 8 More recently, I discussed the approach the Court should take in assessing the level of owner support for an electricity easement in Top Energy Limited – Whakataha Z1C. 9 I concluded in that decision that the approach taken...

10. Bhana v Paniora - Wairau North 1B2C (2013) 69 Taitokerau 139 (69 TTK 139) [pdf, 155 KB]

    ...145D3B2B110 decisions were concerned more with the sufficiency of interests of the landowner rather than the sufficiency of support. The Rudolph v Reti – Otetao B3A211 decision did address sufficiency of support in the particular context of that appeal but did not discuss the principles to any degree. [40] The Māori Appellate Court has considered the equivalent test of sufficiency of support that applies to applications for partition, amalgamation or aggregation orders in s 288(...