Search Results

1. [2018] NZEnvC 106 The Wellington Company Limited v The Save Erskine College Trust [pdf, 210 KB]

   BEFORE THE ENVIRONMENT COURT I MUA I TE KOOTI TAIAO 0 AOTEAROA IN THE MATTER AND IN THE MATTER BETWEEN AND AND Decision No. [2018] NZEnvC 106 of the Resource Management Act 1991 ("RMA") of an appeal under s 195 RMA THE WELLINGTON COMPANY LIMITED ("TWCl") (ENV-2017 -WlG-000038) Appellant THE SAVE ERSKINE COllEGE TRUST ("SECT") Respondent HERITAGE NEW ZEALAND POUHERE TAONGA ("HNZPT") Section 274 RMA Party Court: Princ...

2. 2020-12-02 Minute Final Timetable and Expert Conferencing Directions [pdf, 138 KB]

   ...2 See Minute - Timetable Directions and Expert Conferencing for PC 7 dated 2 November 2020 at [15]-[17]. 3 ORC advices that it cannot formally resolve to make Chapter 3 operative as its provisions interface with other provisions that have been appealed by Port Otago to the Court of Appeal. 4 Alliance Group Ltd v Otago Regional Council [2019] NZEnvC 42 dated 15 March 2019. 5 National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management 2020, cl 4.1. 6 National Policy Statement for Freshwater Ma...

3. White v Eriwata - Waitara SD sections 6 and 91 Land Trust (2006) 165 Aotea MB 37 (165 AOT 37) [pdf, 330 KB]

   ...application for injunction per section 19(1)(a) of Te Ture Whenua Maori Act 1993 against Margaret Eriwata. In that same decision Ms Eriwata's application for an injunction against the trustees of the land was dismissed. [2] Ms Eriwata then appealed that decision, which was heard before the Maori Appellate Court on 14 December 2005, 15 Whanganui Appellate Court MB 198 (15 WGAP 198). In its judgment of 22 December 2005 that Court dismissed the appeal, 15 Whanganui Appellate Cou...

4. [2017] NZEnvC 161 Minister of Corrections v Otorohanga District Council [pdf, 1.2 MB]

   ...disclosed to the court, counsel and to the parties and their expert witnesses on the following terms: (a) publication or communication of the works requirements in whole or in part to those other than the court, counsel and the parties to this appeal (including their expert witnesses) is prohibited; (b) that part of the hearing at which the works requirements is likely to be referred shall be held with the public excluded, if requested. The exclusion of the public does not apply t...

5. [2017] NZEmpC 44 Lyttelton Port Co Ltd v Arthurs [pdf, 90 KB]

   ...any costs order” that might be made by the Authority, and costs. Application for stay [11] The application for a stay was filed on 18 April 2017. The grounds of that application are: a. If no stay is granted, the applicant’s right of appeal will be ineffectual as the respondent will have returned to the workplace; b. The appeal is brought and prosecuted for good reasons and in good faith. c. The respondent will not be injuriously affected by a stay as the respondent...

6. Enforcement of Access Direction (s104) [pdf, 223 KB]

   ...Before you continue Please tick to confirm the following: The Privacy Commissioner has issued an access direction against the agency. The agency has not complied with the access direction or has not complied in full. The agency has not lodged an appeal within 20 working days from the date of the notice given to the parties under section 91(7) of the Privacy Act 2020. When to use this form Use this form when applying for an order requiring the agency to comply with the access direct...

7. DH v Secretary for Justice [2021] NZRA 002 (3 May 2021) [pdf, 168 KB]

   ...(murder and attempted murder). She cross examined crown witnesses in both matters including an expert pathologist; [v] She has had substantial and active involvement in all aspects of trial including drafting submissions (including High Court appeals and appearing in the Court of Appeal to challenge a pre-trial ruling for which she drafted the legal submissions and made oral submissions at the hearing); [vi] Completed the Law Society’s Litigation skills program in 2019 and in...

8. [2022] NZEmpC 1 GF v OO [pdf, 193 KB]

   ...while noting that the plaintiffs had acted reasonably in pursuing the proceedings. See too NZDSOS Inc v Minister for COVID-19 Response [2021] NZSC 189 at [7], a recent Supreme Court judgment declining to award costs on an application for leave to appeal directly to the Supreme Court because the proceeding concerned a matter of public importance and the applicants acted reasonably in seeking leave for a direct appeal. Conclusion [21] In all of the circumstances I consider...

9. [2022] NZEmpC 103 Pilgrim v Attorney-General [pdf, 230 KB]

   ...135, [2017] 1 NZLR 310 at [2] in relation to the principle generally; and, in relation to access to Court documents, see the discussion in Commissioner of Police v Doyle [2017] NZHC 3049; and Berry v Crimson Consulting Ltd [2017] NZHC 3026 upheld on appeal in Berry v Crimson Consulting Ltd [2018] NZCA 460. http://www.legislation.govt.nz/regulation/public/2017/0193/latest/link.aspx?id=DLM7379817&DLM7379817 http://www.legislation.govt.nz/regulation/public/2017/0193/latest/link.aspx?id=D...

10. [2023] NZEnvC 072 Whangarei District Council v Robinson [pdf, 248 KB]

    ...Practice Note 2023 at 10.7(d). 6 Emma Jane Ltd v Christchurch City Council Decision No. 020/09. 7 Re Queenstown Airport Corporation Limited [2019] NZEnvC 37. [6] [7] [8] 4 (a) no costs, which is normally the position in relation to plan appeals under Schedule 1 to the Act or in cases where some aspect of the public interest counts against any award being made; (b) standard costs, which generally fall between 25 - 33% of the costs actually and reasonably incurred by a success...