Search Results

1. LCRO 227/2020 & LCRO 34/2021 PA v NL and UL (22 February 2022) [pdf, 209 KB]

   ...following manner:21 19 UY v FB LCRO 191/2019 (26 November 2020). 20 Conducted by audio-visual means on 4 February 2022. 21 Deliu v Connell [2016] NZHC 361, [2016] NZAR 475 at [2]. 8 A review by the LCRO is neither a judicial review nor an appeal. Those seeking a review of a Committee determination are entitled to a review based on the LCRO’s own opinion rather than on deference to the view of the Committee. A review by the LCRO is informal, inquisitorial and robust. It inv...

2. Auckland Standards Committee 4 v O'Boyle [2021] NZLCDT 27 (29 October 2021) [pdf, 170 KB]

   ...other cases. 10 Orders [35] Ms O’Boyle is suspended from practice for a period of six weeks. The period of suspension will commence on Saturday 18 December 2021 and conclude on Saturday 29 January 2022. If Ms O’Boyle’s appeal about these disciplinary matters is unlikely to be heard before this period, she may apply on seven days’ notice to vary the dates. [36] Ms O’Boyle must pay each of the two complainants the sum of $3,000 (total of $6,000) by 31 M...

3. [2021] NZEnvC 170 Minister of Conservation v Northland Regional Council [pdf, 399 KB]

   Minister of Conservation v Northland Regional Council (Topic 5 – Water Quality) IN THE ENVIRONMENT COURT AT AUCKLAND I TE KŌTI TAIAO O AOTEAROA KI TĀMAKI MAKAURAU Decision [2021] NZEnvC 170 IN THE MATTER OF an appeal under Clause 14 of Schedule 1 of the Resource Management Act 1991 (the Act) and Topic 5 (Water Quality) of the Proposed Northland Regional Plan BETWEEN MINISTER OF CONSERVATION (ENV-2019-AKL-122) AND ROYAL FOREST AND BIRD PROTECTION SOCIETY OF NEW Z...

4. King v Manukonga - Section 11 Oākura Town Belt (Oākura Pā) (2021) 437 Aotea MB 124 (437 AOT 124) [pdf, 303 KB]

   ...Section 227A of the Act is also relevant. It provides that a trustee must not be involved in any decision making concerning an issue that affects them directly, or indirectly, particularly where there is the prospect of gain. As the Court of Appeal set out in its decision Naera v Fenwick, the conflict rules are prophylactic in that they are designed to remove the fruits of temptation.13 That is why it is critical that a trustee must bring a mind unclouded by personal considerations...

5. [2021] NZEnvC 151 New Plymouth District Council v Bolton [pdf, 243 KB]

   ...planner wrote to the Council again stating that the Respondents “do not consider there is much merit in meeting to discuss the compliance matters as our focus is on the land use consent process”.12 To date the abatement notice has not been appealed. The new application for consent On 6 September 2021, the Council received a new consent application on behalf of the Boltons to: 13 (a) Establish a rural industry and processing facility at the property; and (b) Change the c...

6. [2023] NZEmpC 11 New Zealand Air Line Pilots’ Assoc IUOW Inc v Airways Corp of New Zealand Ltd [pdf, 282 KB]

   ...practicable, all leave commitments are planned to be met and spread as evenly as possible throughout the year. [46] The obligation to consult staff and to take their preferences into account when compiling the leave roster, and the existence of an appeal process by referring any disagreement to head office, supports the conclusion that the parties created a comprehensive mechanism. The second sentence in cl 5.2.1 Ms Dunn relied on, specifying how much leave may be allocated, does...

7. [2023] NZEmpC 36 Hilford v Board of Trustees of Whangarei Boys’ High School [pdf, 253 KB]

   ...is brought, however, those documents should be available for consideration by the Court. It would then be the Court’s responsibility to consider the issue of destruction at the end of the process, including for the purposes of any subsequent appeal(s). (e) The parties may request provision by the Authority of the 10 documents which neither currently possesses, if one or other, or both, consider this is appropriate for the presentation of their case. [51] Because this judgment r...

8. Tana v Mahanga - Pukahakaha East 5B (2022) 255 Taitokerau MB 229 (255 TTK 229) [pdf, 267 KB]

   ...Horina Nepia and Te Hiwi Piahana Whānau Trust v Ngāti Tukorehe Tribal Committee and Tahamata Incorporation (2014) 319 Aotea MB 238 (319 AOT 238) at [11]. 4 Nicholls v Nicholls – Part Papaaroha 6B Block (2011) Māori Appellate Court MB 64 (2011 APPEAL 64). 5 Riddiford v Te Whaiti (2001) 13 Tākitimu Appellate MB 184 (13 ACTK 184). 6 Manuirirangi v Paraninihi ki Waitotara Incorporation (2002) 15 Whanganui Appellate MB 64 (15 WGAP 64). 7 De Loree v Mokomoko and Ors – Hiwarau C...

9. LCRO 62/2021 NR v JM (16 June 2022) [pdf, 198 KB]

   ...following way:7 4 NR’s supporting reasons (4 May 2021) at [1]. 5 At [3]. 6 Email from JM to LCRO (9 June 2021). 7 Deliu v Connell [2016] NZHC 361, [2016] NZAR 475 at [2]. 4 A review by the LCRO is neither a judicial review nor an appeal. Those seeking a review of a Committee determination are entitled to a review based on the LCRO’s own opinion rather than on deference to the view of the Committee. A review by the LCRO is informal, inquisitorial and robust. It invol...

10. [2021] NZIACDT 23 - CL v Khetarpal (24 September 2021) [pdf, 228 KB]

    ...Khetarpal [2017] NZIACDT 4. 10 The Tribunal’s requirement that Ms Khetarpal could not apply for a full licence until she had practised under a provisional licence for two years, was deleted by consent in settling the District Court proceedings. The appeals against the Khan, J and Prajapati decisions were otherwise dismissed. 11 such application from Ms Khetarpal lies in the Registrar’s discretion to consider the practitioner’s disciplinary history in assessing fitness to...