Search Results

1. Federated Farmers of New Zealand.pdf [pdf, 449 KB]

   ...permitted activities to adjust their farm systems discharge of N, P, sediment and E.coli. The Appellant has not specified how and when the stocking rate should be applied. Instead, if stocking rate is to apply to both dairy and drystock, careful assessment of implications and effectiveness is needed, as well as the threshold values chosen. The Appellant says Rule 3.11.4.3 applies a different permitted activity threshold metric for drystock farming compared to that applyin...

2. [2020] NZEnvC 205 Todd v Queenstown Lakes District Council [pdf, 3.3 MB]

   BEFORE THE ENVIRONMENT COURT AT CHRISTCHURCH I MUA I TE KOTI TAIAO O AOTEAROA Kl OTAUTAHI IN THE MATTER AND BETWEEN AND AND Decision No. [2020] NZEnvC 205 of the Resource Management Act 1991 of two appeals under s 120 of the Act GRAEME MORRIS TODD, JANE ELLEN TODD AND JOHN WILLIAM TROON (ENV-2019-CHC-108) MICHAEL CAMERON BRIAL AND EMILY JANE O'NEIL BRIAL (ENV-2019-CHC-114) Appellants QUEENSTOWN LAKES DISTRICT COUNCIL Respondent S AND S BLACKLER, B AND

3. [2008] NZEmpC AC 35/08 Webb v New Zealand Tramways and Public Passengers Transport Union Inc [pdf, 30 KB]

   ...that has not really been challenged. Starting at the far end of the time scale, the union’s rules provide that its National Council must meet annually. While it is true that it may elect to meet more frequently than annually, the members’ protection provided by the rules lies in the fact of at least one annual meeting. This must be in November. Unless there is a meeting of the union’s National Council in November 2008, there is no requirement for such a meeting for another 1...

4. Legal aid for civil family disputes - Māori [pdf, 850 KB]

   ...tirohia ngā whārangi kikorangi o te pukawaea i raro i a ‘Justice’, haere rānei ki justice.govt.nz/ family-justice Mō ētahi atu kōrero mō ngā whakatau whakamarutanga me te Domestic Violence Act, tirohia: • te mātārere ‘Legal Aid Protection Orders’ (Te Tāhū o te Ture) • te pepakōrero ‘Domestic Violence’ (LawAccess). Mēnā kāore i te pai ki a koe te whakatau i muri o te whakatau anō, ka taea pea e koe te tuku tono ki te Legal Aid Tribunal. Ka arotakehia e t...

5. Auckland District Law Society v Mathias [2010] NZLCDT 10 [pdf, 42 KB]

   ...publication occur. [13] We do not have evidence as to the process by which the decision about non-opposition to Mr Mathias’ practising on his own account was reached. We make the comment that in future such applications will undoubtedly need to be carefully scrutinised by the Society before there is agreement or non-opposition to a practitioner applying to recommence practice on his own account. [14] The Society seeks costs in respect of the considerable work which has been put...

6. GH v UF LCRO 22 / 2011 (9 November 2011) [pdf, 84 KB]

   ...always sent to the Applicant‟s lawyer. The Practitioner did not represent the Applicant and did not have direct contact with him. [29] The Applicant had legal representation throughout. It was the responsibility of the Applicant‟s lawyer to protect his interests. This was not the responsibility of the Practitioner who acted for the party on the other side of a transaction. If the Practitioner subsequently advanced a position contrary to an earlier position, then it is to be...

7. Appellant v The Real Estate Agents Authority (CAC 410) & Geoffrey Twigden [2017] NZREADT 79 [pdf, 236 KB]

   ...person’s knowledge of and experience in the industry may equally be regarded as a relevant mitigating factor when assessing penalty. [25] The purpose of the requirement to provide written appraisals, and copies of the approved guide, is to protect the interests of who use licensees’ services, as vendors or as customers. We accept Ms Mok’s submission that in the present case, it was open to the Committee to take into account [the trustee owners’] experience in the real estat...

8. Canterbury District Law Society v Wood [2009] NZLCDT 11 [pdf, 125 KB]

   ...of months culminating in the deliberately misleading response, a planned response to enquiries made, involving deceit, and a deliberate misleading of a fellow practitioner and the Court. [19] Mr Wood claimed that his response was necessary to protect what he saw as his client’s best interests. As a matter of fact we doubt that what he did was in his client’s best interests, but quite apart from that issue, such a response is not open to a practitioner. Deliberately misleading th...

9. [2017] NZEnvC 022 J Lenihan & Others v Auckland Council [pdf, 314 KB]

   ...noted as Proposed Appel/ants (with the exception of Mr Frizzell, who has not actively participated) have lodged submissions in support of the their positions, and I shall return to those shortly. [3] The Council, supported by the Waitakere Ranges Protection Society Inc (in respect of the Lenihan appeal), Dickson Yachting Ltd and Housing New Zealand Corporation (in respect of the Puhoi Community Forum appeal), submits that those persons do not have such a right of appeal. It needs to...

10. BORA Misuse of Drugs Amendment Bill [pdf, 124 KB]

    ...limitations on the presumption of innocence. In R v Oakes the Supreme Court of Canada held that the presumption of supply served a pressing social objective and that this objective was of sufficient importance to warrant overriding a constitutionally protected right or freedom in certain cases.3 16. A majority of the Court in Hansen also appeared to accept that controlling the risk posed to society by the supply of marijuana was a significant and important objective. The previous At...