Search Results

1. [2020] NZEnvC 174 Hamilton City Council v Global Metal Solutions Limited.pdf [pdf, 3.7 MB]

   .... ... Explanation Industrial activities can generate adverse amenity effects beyond the boundaries of the zone. These can have a particular impact on residential and open space areas where expectations for amenity are far higher. The Amenity Protection Area is a key mechanism to protect residential sites where they are adjacent to land within the Industrial Zone. Industrial properties covered by the Amenity Protection Area are subject to additional standards. Enhanced management of n...

2. [2019] NZEnvC 041 Oceana Gold New Zealand Limited v Otago Regional Council [pdf, 1.3 MB]

   ...AOTEAROA IN THE MATTER AND BETWEEN AND Decision No. [2019] NZEnvC41 of the Resource Management Act 1991 of appeals under clause 14 of Schedule 1 to the Act OCEANA GOLD (NEW ZEALAND) LIMITED (ENV-2016-CHC-103) ROYAL FOREST AND BIRD PROTECTION SOCIETY OF NEW ZEALAND INCORPORATED (ENV-2016-CHC-102) ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENCE SOCIETY INCORPORATED (ENV-2016-CHC-122) Appellants OTAGO REGIONAL COUNCIL Respondent Court: Environment Judge J R Jackson Environment Commis...

3. [2014] NZEmpC 171 Bracewell v Richmond Services Ltd costs [pdf, 72 KB]

   ...that Richmond should not be awarded costs for this application was appropriate. c) With regard to the substantive hearing, the challenge had merit because the Court found that certain of Ms Bracewell’s disclosures were justified under the Protected Disclosures Act 2000 and under her employment agreement. It was submitted that the defendant’s offer to resolve the matter was not reasonable. Reference was also made to an offer to mediate the matter further in February 2014, it...

4. Putataua Bay Holdings Ltd v Pere - Lot 189 DP 393664 (2014) 82 Taitokerau MB 139 (82 TTK 139) [pdf, 91 KB]

   ...requiring Mr Pere and his wife to remove the Portacom because there was evidence before the High Court that Mr and Mrs Pere did not in fact own the Portacom. That was enough to defeat the enforcement of the injunction. Discussion [22] I have carefully considered the documents filed on behalf of PBH and conclude that it would not be safe to grant an interim injunction on an exparte basis at this juncture. I have two primary concerns. [23] First, there is a question over whether...

5. Stratton v REAA & Mathews [2013] NZREADT 37 [pdf, 58 KB]

   ...appellant was “real estate agency work”. The question is the application to that conduct of Rule 9.12 which provides: “9.12 An agent must not impose conditions on a client through an agency agreement that are not reasonably necessary to protect the interests of the agent.” [14] The Act and the Rules came into force on 17 November 2009. The agreement between Messrs Mathews and Stratton (for Bayleys) was signed on 27 October 2007. Accordingly, r.9.12 did not apply at the tim...

6. CAC10003 v Kumandan [2013] NZREADT 28 [pdf, 46 KB]

   ...commissions on related sales which did not proceed. He also tried to blame the administrative assistant for the forgery. [16] The case law against a conclusion that dishonesty necessarily means an agent’s character is impugned. We have therefore carefully examined his reputation, behaviour and other qualities. We know that Mr Kumandan was a solicitor/lawyer in his native South Africa; he told the Tribunal during the hearing that it had been hard to get work as an agent and so began...

7. Auckland Standards Committee v Rohde [2016] NZLCDT 9 [pdf, 34 KB]

   ...that he had a serious alcohol addiction, which he could not tackle alone, or without a serious intervention. 3 Issues [8] The issues for the Tribunal, in assessing penalty, are: 1. Do the public, as consumers, need to be directly protected from Mr Rohde? 2. Having regard to aggravating and mitigating features, and relevant case law, is a penalty less than suspension sufficient to mark the seriousness of Mr Rohde’s conduct? [9] In her submissions for the Standard...

8. CT v XD LCRO 218 / 2010 (10 June 2011) [pdf, 88 KB]

   ...unsatisfactory conduct. The question would be however, as to who was at fault. Was it the Respondent, Ms D, or CU? There is insufficient evidence to lay the blame for this entirely at the door of the Respondent. In addition, the Applicant’s position was protected by the steps taken by Ms D to adjourn the meeting, and when considered in the context of the overall proceedings, it would be somewhat harsh to single out the conduct relating to this meeting as constituting unsatisfactor...

9. BORA Taxation (Annual Rates, GST, Trans-Tasman Imputation and Miscellaneous Provision) Bill [pdf, 49 KB]

   ...resources and individual investors in these arrangements can be exposed to unexpected interest and penalties on any resulting unpaid tax. By providing greater certainty as to the application of tax laws, the proposed new subpart is expected to increase protection for taxpayers from avoidable shortfall penalties and interest. 16. The proposed new subpart ES treats taxpayers in a marital relationship differently from other taxpayers in order to recognise the financial interdependence bet...

10. BORA Veterinarians Bill [pdf, 95 KB]

    ...using their services have confidence in them. Veterinarians not only deal with animals and their owners, they also play an important role in food assurance systems, assist in ensuring that New Zealand’s export markets for meat and dairy products are protected (i.e. that the country’s export comply with importing country requirements), and assist in reducing bio-security risks to the country. In our opinion, the identified discrimination appears to be justified in terms of section 5 of...