Search Results

1. [2024] NZREADT 38 – TX v REAA (22 October 2024) [pdf, 161 KB]

   ...consideration; or (4) was plainly wrong. [44] It was submitted by the Registrar that, subject to these limitations, the Registrar’s decision must be confirmed, even if the Tribunal might come to a different decision on the merits if it was a general appeal. [45] We accept counsel’s submissions as to the nature of this review. We will, in deciding whether these limited grounds of review have been made out, need to make some assessment of the merits, without reaching any conclu...

2. Paea v McLeod - Succession to Donald Te Whetu McLeod [2024] Chief Judge's MB 1982 (2024 CJ 1982) [pdf, 564 KB]

   ...that standard’s inherent flexibility that takes into account the nature and gravity of the matter at issue.14 This means that the applicant must establish on the balance of probabilities that there was a mistake or omission. [43] The Court of Appeal has confirmed that the power under s 44(1) falls into two parts:15 The first is an evaluative decision as to whether the order made was “erroneous in fact and law because of any mistake or omission on the part of the court or the...

3. [2017] NZEnvC 109 Norsho Bulc Limited v Auckland Council [pdf, 2.5 MB]

   ...rural character and amenity. (f) Neither of the s 1 04( d) RMA gateway tests were met. (g) The site did not differ from the generality of sites in the rural zone to an extent that warranted special consideration for consent. [2] The decision was appealed by Norsho Bulc, seeking consents for the proposal subject to appropriate conditions. The Blackbridge Environmental Protection Society Incorporated (the Society) registered an interest in the appeal in support of the Council's...

4. [2023] NZEnvC 141 Nature Preservation Trustee Limited v Queenstown Lakes District Council [pdf, 30 MB]

   NATURE PRESERVATION TRUSTEE LIMITED v QLDC – CONSENT ORDER IN THE ENVIRONMENT COURT AT CHRISTCHURCH I TE KŌTI TAIAO O AOTEAROA KI ŌTAUTAHI Decision No. [2023] NZEnvC 141 IN THE MATTER of the Resource Management Act 1991 AND an appeal under s120 of the Act BETWEEN NATURE PRESERVATION TRUSTEE LIMITED (ENV-2022-CHC-42) Appellant AND QUEENSTOWN LAKES DISTRICT COUNCIL Respondent Environment Judge J J M Hassan – sitting alone under s279 of the Act In Chambers at Chr...

5. Tupe Snr v Everton - Manunui No 1 4th Residue Ahu Whenua Trust (2015) 334 Aotea MB 227 (334 AOT 227) [pdf, 330 KB]

   ...out in s 73 must be satisfied, with the onus on the affected trustees to provide the necessary evidence and submissions. Further, while the Court can grant such relief, that remedy will not be given lightly. 25 [43] In Wong v Burt the Court of Appeal held that s 73 was not available when trustees had proceeded, with the knowledge that their actions had already been questioned as potentially being unlawful. 26 In such a situation, the Court stated, the proper course was to have...

6. Clearwater Cove Apartments Body Corporate 170989 v Auckland Council [2011] NZWHT Auckland 39 [pdf, 389 KB]

   ...RESIDENTIAL UNIT OWNERS IN A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT? [23] Ms Thodey submitted that the Council did not owe a duty of care to residential owners in a mixed commercial/residential development. However, since this claim was heard the Court of Appeal considered this issue in North Shore City Council v Body Corporate 207624 (Spencer on Byron).6 [24] In Spencer on Byron the application for building consent referred to the ―Byron Avenue hotel‖ and described it as a hotel/a...

7. Darryl Sycamore [pdf, 457 KB]

   ...array of native fauna including threatened bird species. Those birds are free to migrate to, and beyond the Ecosanctuary perimeter. 2522007 page 5 The revised proposal 25 Following the decision by the Commissioner, the application was appealed and revised. Mediation was conducted, although no resolution was reached. The revised proposal is set out in the evidence of Mr Scott Willis. The key difference is the three-turbine proposal has been amended to that of a single tur...

8. [2018] NZEnvC 083 Willowridge Developments Ltd v Queenstown Lakes District Council [pdf, 11 MB]

   BEFORE THE ENVIRONMENT COURT I MUA I TE KOOTI TAIAO 0 AOTEAROA Court: IN THE MATTER AND BETWEEN AND Decision No. [20181 NZEnvC 83 of the Resource Management Act 1991 of an appeal pursuant to section 120 of the Act WILLOWRIDGE DEVELOPMENTS LIMITED (ENV-2017 -CHC-27) Appellant QUEENSTOWN LAKES DISTRICT COUNCIL Respondent Environment Judge J R Jackson Environment Commissioner J R Mills Environment Commissioner D J Bunting Hearing: at Wanaka on 4 and 5 December...

9. Supplementary Government Response to Law Commissions report [pdf, 479 KB]

   ...complaints can be resolved quickly and efficiently. The proposal will enable the Commissioner to make decisions on complaints relating to access to information, rather than the Human Rights Review Tribunal. The Commissioner’s decisions can be appealed to the Tribunal. This implements a recommendation of the Law Commission. 5 Other proposals The Government has also agreed to a number of other proposals, including: • creating new offences relating to misleading an agen...

10. Director of Proceedings v Smith (Application for Final Non-Publication Orders) [2019] NZHRRT 32 [pdf, 695 KB]

    ...New Zealand Bill of Rights Act we summarise our conclusions before returning to the facts of the case. The decision in Waxman [72] The significance of Waxman lies in its interpretation of HRA, s 107 in the light of the decision of the Court of Appeal in Y v Attorney-General [2016] NZCA 474 (4 October 2016) and the subsequent (and superseding) decision of the Supreme Court in Erceg v Erceg [2016] NZSC 135, [2017] 1 NZLR 310. Both senior court decisions addressed the test to be applie...