Search Results

1. White and Te Korowai Tiaki o Te Hauāuru Incorporated Society v Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Tama Trust (2020) 415 Aotea MB 164 (415 AOT 164) [pdf, 290 KB]

   ...transaction vote. [13] Counsel for Te Korowai also referred to the concurrent Environment Court proceedings regarding the Mt Messenger project. Counsel advised that the Environment 415 Aotea MB 171 Court has issued an interim decision, the appeal of which is to be heard by the High Court in August 2020. In this regard, counsel noted that there does not seem to be any urgency to undertake the major transaction vote immediately, as it could potentially be held in June and...

2. INZ (Greathead) v Ortiz [2019] NZIACDT 59 (29 August 2019) [pdf, 154 KB]

   ...Zealand’s letter to the client by email on 27 July 2015. She asked him to call her. [17] On 30 July 2015, Ms Ortiz responded by email to Immigration New Zealand advising that the client’s dairy industry experience was false and seeking “an appeal on humanitarian considerations for the Waiver of the Character Requirements”. His real skill was as a barber. She blamed the staff of the recruiter he had earlier used. [18] From September 2015, the client was given a weekly $40...

3. David Guccione Evidence in Chief [pdf, 290 KB]

   BEFORE THE ENVIRONMENT COURT Auckland Registry ENV 2015 AKL 0000134 IN THE MATTER AND BETWEEN AND of the Resource Management Act 1991 of an appeal under Clause 14 of the First Schedule of the Act TRUSTEES OF MOTITI ROHE MOANA TRUST Appellant BAY OF PLENTY REGIONAL COUNCIL Respondent STATEMENT OF EVIDENCE OF ·DAVID GUCCIONE ON BEHALF OF MOTITI ROHE MOANATRUST 25th October 2017 Counsel Acting . Rob Enright . Barrister Level 1, Stanbeth House 28 Customs St E...

4. ZQN Apartments TRI 2021-100-001 Procedural Order 9 [pdf, 225 KB]

   ...building work (as defined) then it is subject to the long stop period. I see no need for the Act to go further and specify that it applies to claims for contribution as well as to claims by plaintiffs. [38] Courtney J highlighted the Court of Appeal’s observations in Johnson v Watson (in the context of alleged concealment by fraud) as to the wording of s 91(2) in support:13 [8] … Section 91(2) is … concerned with the act or omission on which the proceedings are based. An a...

5. [2022] NZEnvC 233 Wellington Regional Council v Crosbie [pdf, 489 KB]

   ...Britton and Mr Garden for the Greater Wellington Regional Council. 3. As a result of the determination, the District Court made orders: (a) Prohibiting Mr Page and Ms Crosbie from commencing or continuing any activities that are not permitted by the Appeals Version of the Proposed Natural Resources Plan (pNRP) for the Wellington Region and the National Environmental Standards for Freshwater (and any subsequent versions of or successors to either document) within the wetlands at 127...

6. Auckland Standards Committee 1 v Ms A [2022] NZLCDT 51 (22 December 2022) [pdf, 255 KB]

   ...(and their firm), their client and Ms A’s former boyfriend and organisations with which he was associated. 2. Ms A was refused interim name suppression by the Tribunal, but her name remains suppressed by interim order of the High Court pending appeal. Mr Brookie indicates she may seek final name suppression. We expect her to file such an application no later than 1 February 2023. We make an interim order suppressing her name at least until her application for final name suppress...

7. [2022] NZEnvC 143 Western Bay of Plenty District Council [pdf, 357 KB]

   ...will be consulted on the financial contribution provisions and will have the opportunity to make submissions on the proposed financial contribution rules, including the level of contributions proposed, in the Schedule 1 process, with a right of appeal from any decision by the Council on their submissions. [20] For those reasons I accept that giving the proposed financial contribution rules immediate legal effect is necessary to achieve the sustainable management purpose of the RMA...

8. Engelbrecht TRI-2020-100-007 Procedural Order 6 [pdf, 185 KB]

   ...[1984] 2 NZLR 548 (HC) at 593–595; Hermann v Martin [2020] NZHC 688 at [39]. 11 Morton, above n 10. 12 Trevor Ivory Ltd v Anderson [1992] 2 NZLR 517 (CA) at 527. 13 Hsu v Mahoney [2021] NZHC 1611 at [186]–[194], relying on the Court of Appeal in Body Corporate 202254 v Taylor [2008] NZCA 317, [2009] 2 NZLR 17. 14 At [203] (footnote omitted). 6 designed by Paul Maurice Foley (Mr Foley), the fourth respondent, possibly on behalf of Paul Foley Design Ltd (PFDL). The...

9. [2021] NZREADT 35 - Brady (7 July 2021) [pdf, 287 KB]

   ...Committee’s costs. The payment is to be made to the Authority within 20 working days of the date of this decision. [58] Pursuant to s 113 of the Act, the Tribunal draws the parties’ attention to s 116 of the Act, which sets out the right of appeal to the High Court. The procedure to be followed is set out in part 20 of the High Court Rules. _________________ Hon P J Andrews Chairperson ________________ Ms C Sandelin Member ________________...

10. LCRO 43/2020 SL v DN (29 September 2021) [pdf, 231 KB]

    ...the Standards Committee file and all material lodged in conjunction with this review. Scope of review [47] The High Court has described a review by this Office in the following way:18 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...