Search Results

1. Grindle v CAC 20004 & Bracey [2014] NZREADT 85 [pdf, 48 KB]

   ...to cross-examine the licensee appellant as he did not dispute the evidence. General Principles [23] In determining an appropriate penalty, decisions of industry disciplinary tribunals should emphasise the maintenance of high standards and the protection of the public (through both specific and general deterrence). While this may mean that orders made in disciplinary proceedings have a punitive effect, this is not their purpose Z v CAC [2009] 1 NZLR 1 at [97]. As McGrath J said for t...

2. BORA Search and Surveillance Bill [pdf, 334 KB]

   ...is present. For example, a search of the private areas of a house will necessitate greater justification than a search of its grounds.[7] 9. It is also noted that s 21 is to be applied without reference to the provision for justified limitation of protected rights in s 5 of the Bill of Rights Act: the Supreme Court has held that an unreasonable search or seizure is not open to justification.[8] 10. Third, the general requirement of a judicially issued warrant provides prior and indepe...

3. BORA Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill [pdf, 408 KB]

   ...Those grounds include race and ethnic origin. [6] 18. The Bill treats those holding customary rights differently from the holders of other categories of title: 18.1 The Bill accords holders of customary title a range of statutory rights and protections, including greater and/or potentially greater rights in respect of resource management and other decision-making. Customary title holders will not, however, have a general right of exclusive occupation – and so will not be able to...

4. [2018] NZEnvC 028 McIntyre v Canterbury Regional Council [pdf, 2.9 MB]

   ...the Resource Management Act 1991 , the Environment Court orders that D R Mcintyre and Waitaki Trustees Golden Acres Ltd are to pay Uointly and severally): (a) $32,500 to Mackenzie Guardians Incorporated; and (b) $37,000 to Royal Forest and Bird Protection Society of New Zealand Incorporated. B: Under section 286 of the Resource Management Act 1991 , the District Court at Timaru is named as the Court this order may be filed in for enforcement purposes (if necessary). MciNTYRE &...

5. Afemui v Tangilanu [2014] NZIACDT 94 (01 October 2014) [pdf, 199 KB]

   ...(this complaint is one of them), where I have prevented Ms Tangilanu reapplying for a licence for two years, I explain why I do not consider rehabilitation is realistic. The sanctions relating to Ms Tangilanu’s ability to hold a licence address the protection of the public and the desirability of rehabilitation. In relation to the other sanctions, the orders excluding Ms Tangilanu from practising are taken into account as part of the matrix of penalties. [13] Each of the 12 complaints...

6. AG v ZT LCRO 159 / 2010 (18 February 2011) [pdf, 107 KB]

   ...conduct met a standard of professionalism that was required and expected in the circumstances, in this case specifically relating to the scope of enquiry concerning the nature of ownership of the house. [21] The Practitioner denied any failure to protect her clients’ interests, implied that H did not hold positive feelings for the Applicant, and asserted that H had intended to leave nothing to the Applicant. I have discerned no evidence to support these submissions, noting that H...

7. COES - EiC - J R Sullivan (5 Feb 2021) [pdf, 2.4 MB]

   ...and walking the Manuherekia from its source to the confluence with the Clutha/ Mata-au, as well as three tributary streams. 5 I’m the secretary of the Central Otago Environmental Society (COES), a locally based organisation committed to the protection and enhancement of the Central Otago environment including landscapes and water resources. 6 As a member of this community group dedicated to the preservation of the natural environment, I am concerned about the degradation of the...

8. [2022] NZEnvC 258 Southland District Council v Chartres [pdf, 279 KB]

   ...appropriate as not only are all of the factors outlined in DFC Ltd v Bielby present, but the extent of the Council’s failure and manner in which it conducted the proceedings were a “considerable step up in terms of irresponsible, incompetent and careless conduct”.4 The respondent compares the matter to the recent costs decision in Greater Wellington Regional Council v Adams,5 where indemnity was awarded as the Council had failed to substantive any of the grounds on which it h...

9. Auckland Standards Committee 5 v Stuhlmann [2022] NZLCDT 16 (2 June 2022) [pdf, 120 KB]

   ...partner, who had been in poor health and was retiring. • He saw no need to advise his new partners, hoping the matter would resolve without embarrassment to him. • Now that his partners are aware of the problem, they are able to take some protective steps. [14] We accept that Mr Stuhlmann has experienced five years of regret. That he remained relatively (effectively) inert about confronting the problem in a useful manner until March 2022, indicates his heightened level of...

10. [2024] NZEnvC 010 Fraser Auret Racing v Rangitīkei District Council [pdf, 212 KB]

    ...specified ‘outcomes’ within the area. [13] The salient point here is that the objective for the plan change does not signal that activities not conforming to the MIDA are unanticipated and should be disallowed. This is evident with regard to the carefully crafted suite of policies that follow this objective. (footnotes omitted) [26] The High Court observed12 that a consequence of the imposition of Rules DEV-R5 and DEV-R6 would be that even very minor deviations from the specifie...