Search Results

1. 15.-Evidence-of-Mr-Gregor-McLean-Erosion-and-Sediment-Control64012503.1.PDF [PDF, 224 KB]

   ...contributed to the trigger being exceeded. 64. I am comfortable that the proposed suite of monitoring outlined in the ESCMP is appropriate and will ensure a high level of sediment treatment. Page 12 65. I agree with Mr Pearce that greater care is required when working in and around streams.13 Mr Pearce considers a condition requiring that all stream works be undertaken in the 'dry' is required. I consider that this requirement is contained within existing Con...

2. Land-Transport-Drug-Driving-Amendment-Bill.pdf [pdf, 358 KB]

   ...seizure. Section 22 – Right not to be arbitrarily detained 46. Section 22 of the Bill of Rights Act affirms that everyone has the right not to be arbitrarily arrested or detained. The purpose of the right not to be arbitrarily detained is the protection of human dignity, autonomy, and liberty.12 47. A person is regarded as detained within the meaning of s 22 if, amongst other things, there are statutory restraints of a person’s movements (accompanied by penalties for non-complianc...

3. AD v Accident Compensation Corporation (Weekly Compensation) [2023] NZACC 118 [pdf, 201 KB]

   ...familiarise himself with the ACC 1 Alderson v Accident Compensation Corporation [2006] NZACC 129. 10 provisions as it may affect him and it is for him to seek out the necessary advice and take the necessary steps that may be required to fully protect him. [41] In Palmer,2 Judge Joyce stated: [30] Then there would be the issue of whether the Corporation could be determined to be acting "in trade" and that is problematic in itself. Then too - and fundamentally - ev...

4. [2025] NZREADT 06 - UX v REAA (19 February 2025) [pdf, 292 KB]

   ...information redacted largely related to the names of parties presenting tenders, as well as the price and conditions tendered. While no privilege existed, there is an argument that these third parties should have their privacy and business affairs protected. Such rights are afforded under the Privacy Act 2020. It is submitted that the information is unlikely to have a bearing on the Tribunal’s decision, given it was at the discretion of the vendors what tender they accepted. [3...

5. Waikato Bay of Plenty Standards Committee 2 v Leach [2024] NZLCDT 19 (3 July 2024) [pdf, 271 KB]

   ...this is a fundamental failing”. We also accept the submission that these sorts of trust accounting breaches have always been regarded as very serious by the Tribunal. [15] Client funds held in a trust account are separately identified and protected and may only be disbursed in particular circumstances. [16] In contrast, these funds were intermingled with other funds in Ms Leach’s account and were at least theoretically at risk, in contrast to the safety attached had they...

6. [2025] NZEmpC 198 Rural Practice Ltd and Abdul Jabbar v A Labour Inspector [pdf, 234 KB]

   ...excessive penalties. The Authority found a number of breaches [15] The proceedings in the Authority were in respect of three employees of Rural Practice Ltd. [16] The Authority found that: (a) Rural Practice Ltd was in breach of s 4 of the Wages Protection Act 1983, which requires an employer to pay a worker the entire amount of wages due to that worker without deduction. The breaches were in respect of all three employees. (b) Rural Practice Ltd had failed to keep record...

7. LCRO 51/2021 KS and BG v WJ (30 September 2024) [pdf, 410 KB]

   LEGAL COMPLAINTS REVIEW OFFICER ĀPIHA AROTAKE AMUAMU Ā-TURE [2024] NZLCRO 122 Ref: LCRO 51/2021 CONCERNING an application for review pursuant to section 193 of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 AND CONCERNING a decision of the [Area] Standards Committee [X] BETWEEN KS and BG Applicants AND WJ Respondent DECISION Introduction [1] The applicants, Ms KS and Dr BG, have applied for review of a determination by the [Area] Stan

8. Waitangi Tribunal - Part 5 Te Urewera [pdf, 2.1 MB]

   ...accept the Appellate Court’s decision and negotiate with the owners . Even so, he did not do this until 1949, and lost office before he could take matters very far . overall, the Crown’s conduct from 1944 to 1954 breached the standards of active protection and good faith required of a Treaty partner . The Maori owners of Lake Waikaremoana were prejudiced because the Crown prevented the Maori Land Court from completing their titles, and denied their mana, tino rangatiratanga, and their...

9. Taueki v McMillan - Horowhenua 11 (Lake) (2014) 324 Aotea MB 144 (324 AOT 144) [pdf, 311 KB]

   324 Aotea MB 144 IN THE MĀORI LAND COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AOTEA DISTRICT A20030007009 UNDER Section 338(1)(b), Te Ture Whenua Māori Act 1993 IN THE MATTER OF Horowhenua 11 (Lake) Block BETWEEN AND VIVIENNE TAUEKI Applicant MATTHEW McMILLAN & ORS Respondents Hearings: 145 Aotea MB 203-211, 19 October 2004 152 Aotea MB 287-332, 29 March 2005 157 Aotea MB 61-117, 11 & 12 August 2005 161 Aotea

10. [2018] NZEnvC 163 Horowhenua District Council v Manawatu Whanganui Regional Council [pdf, 5.8 MB]

    ...Horowhenua District Council (as Applicant) Ms S Johnston and Ms J Avery for the Manawatu-Wanganui Regional Council and Horowhenua District Council (as Consent Authority) Ms Ongley for Ngati Whakatere and Ngati Raukawa Dr Teo-Sherrell for the Water Protection Society Mr M Smith for Water Environmental Care Association Mr J Bent (self-represented) Mr Andrews (s 274 party) 1 2 Mr G Thompson (s 274 party) Ms C Thompson (s 274 party) Mr W Mc Gregor (s 274 party) Mr D...