14338 items matching your search terms
1 BEFORE THE ENVIRONMENT COURT CHRISTCHURCH REGISTRY ENV-2016-CHC-47 IN THE MATTER of an appeal under Section 120 Resource Management Act 1991 BETWEEN BLUESKIN ENERGY LIMITED Appellant AND DUNEDIN CITY COUNCIL Respondent ACOUSTICS – JOINT WITNESS STATEMENT 6 June 2017 2 Introduction 1. Expert conferencing on acoustics was undertaken between Malcolm Hunt (engaged by Dunedin C...
...the lack of opposition to the proposed transfer is the fact which ought to carry the most 1 Matthews v Matthews – Estate of Graham Ngahina Matthews [2015] Māori Appellate Court MB 512 (2015 APPEAL 512). 2 At [49]. 3 At [55]. 4 Phillips v Ashby – Oromahoe 17B2 (2006) 6 Taitokerau Appellate MB 271 (6 APWH 271) at [16]. 5 Matthews v Matthews – Estate of Graham Ngahina Matthews, above n 1, at [89]. http://www.legislation.g...
...custodian trustee. (5) For every trust constituted under this Part the court shall appoint 1 or more responsible trustees, and may appoint 1 or more advisory trustees and 1 or more custodian trustees. [18] In Clarke v Karaitiana the Court of Appeal considered the nature of the Court’s discretion to appoint trustees under s 222 of the Act:5 [51] The touchstone is s 222(2) itself. In appointing a trustee, the Court is obliged to have regard to the ability, experience and knowle...
...Court hearing was well attended with approximately 40 people present. Of those 40, ten spoke. 10 Wall v The Maori Land Court - Tauhara Middle 15 Trust [2010] Maori Appellate Court MB 55 (2010 APPEAL 55). 77 Tairawhiti MB 193 [25] Mr Vernon Winitana put his case very succinctly and after hearing what others had to say, was given the right of reply. He drew my attention to the kaupapa of the legislation and I do not at all...
...order was made or through submissions on the law. Issues [9] The issues to determine in this case are:- 1 [2009] Chief Judge’s MB 209-225 (2009 CJ 209) 2 [2010] Maori Appellate Court MB 167 (2010 APPEAL 167) 2018 Chief Judge’s MB 632 (1) whether Petuere Rauriki or Raurihi and Petuere Rauriki Tuhiwai Wharemata are the same people, and if not (2) whether there was a mistake in the presentation of the facts to the Court,...
...clear on the face of the Act whether there is a distinction between a censure and a reprimand. The matter was considered in New Zealand Law Society v B. The High Court had considered that a censure was a more serious rebuke. This was rejected on appeal, when it was stated: Both words envisage a disciplinary tribunal, here a Standard Committee, making a formal or official statement rebuking a practitioner for his or her unsatisfactory conduct. A censure or reprimand, however expresse...
...2020 at [34). Affidavit of G O'Reilly dated 14 August 2020 at [32). 4 a vehicle. Mr O'Reilly referred me to a decision Fadi Antoun v Hutt City Counci/12 which considered the question of what comprises a building and a tiny house in an appeal against an abatement notice proceeding. Relying on that decision, Mr O'Reilly says the new construction is fixed to the existing shed by flashings and corrugated iron and is on piles.13 [1 O] In conclusion, Mr O'Reilly s...
...Currently, I am a member of Federated Farmers’ regional policy team and have 16 years of experience working with regional planning processes, including the Canterbury Natural Resources Regional Plan (from submission through to resolution of High Court appeals); development of the Resource Management (Measurement and Reporting of Water Takes) Regulations 2010 and membership of the implementation taskforce for those regulations; the development of catchment-based flow and allocation...
...satisfactorily; or (b) Because of lack of competence or prolonged absence, the trustee is or will be incapable of carrying out those duties satisfactorily. [9] The leading authorities on the appointment and removal of trustees are the Court of Appeal judgments Clarke v Karaitiana and Rameka v Hall.5 [10] In Clarke on the issue of appointing trustees the Court held:6 [51] The touchstone is s 222(2) itself. In appointing a trustee, the Court is obliged to have regard to the abilit...
...kind which justifies joinder. Although it has been held in the High Court that a right to relief may not in fact be required, this prerequisite exists in the present case. d) In Newhaven Waldorf Management Ltd v Allen, the Court of Appeal stated that the threshold for an order under r 4.56 of the HCR was “fairly low” and that:1 A cause of action need not necessarily be advanced (or lie) against a defendant to be added. Indeed, where the plaintiff opposes joinder,...