Search Results

1. KI v Accident Compensation Corporation (Contribution to Cost of Treatment) [2024] NZACC 011 [pdf, 1.8 MB]

   ...injury, with these having had a markedly cumulative effect. [36] The appellant saw Dr Greenblatt again on 16 July 2009 on referral from her GP. Dr Greenblatt noted: She has had some contact with her past psychiatrist, Gil Newburn, but she informs me that ACC will only pay for very brief visits (10 minutes) with her previous psychiatrist. The essence of her problem since I have seen her, she reports, are ongoing difficulties related to her physical health. She reports chroni...

2. ORC - Statement of Evidence - Felicity Boyd - 3 September 2021 [pdf, 3.3 MB]

   ...submission period closed on 2 October 2020 and 12 further submissions were received. 37 The plan change was opposed by 43 submitters and supported by 37 submitters. Seventeen submitters did not state their position.9 A total of 82 submitters requested to be heard but 72 of those indicated they would consider presenting a joint case. I understand the submissions will be discussed in more detail in the additional planning evidence to be filed by 15 October 2021. Overview of land...

3. [2024] NZEnvC 248 Federated Farmers of New Zealand v Waikato District Council [pdf, 6.9 MB]

   ...under section 279(1) of the RMA, such order being by consent, rather than representing a decision or determination on the merits. The Court understands for present purposes that: (a) All parties to the proceedings have executed the memorandum requesting this order; and (b) All parties are satisfied that all matters proposed for the Court’s endorsement fall within the Court’s jurisdiction and conform to the relevant requirements and objectives of the RMA including, in particul...

4. Theobald v Coulter [pdf, 170 KB]

   ...objections to the joinder of Mr L’Ami (refer to Procedural Order No 4 issued on 20 December 2004), and had not supported his application for removal (refer to Procedural Order No 6 issued on 18 February 2005). However, in the light of this information, I advised the parties that I would treat this as an application to remove Mr L’Ami as a party to the adjudication pursuant to s.34 of the WHRS Act. 2.7 It is normal for all the other parties to be given the opportunity to make...

5. Waitangi Tribunal - issue 67 of Te Manutukutuku [pdf, 1.8 MB]

   ...Tuheitia Paki. Mr Henare has had a long asso- ciation with the public service, hav- ing occupied senior roles in the Department of Māori Affairs, the Iwi Transition Agency, and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Having returned home to the North at the request of his people, he has served as general man- ager of the Ngāti Hine Health Trust and chair of the Tai Tokerau Primary Health Organisation. Mr Henare has also been a member of the Northland DHB and the Council of Northtec, and h...

6. OWRUG - M Curran - Supplementary evidence - Appendix 1 - 24 May 2021 [pdf, 4.4 MB]

   ...race or dam for which a current mining privilege has been granted, and for the deposit of soil and other matter removed from the race or dam, the privilege shall, during the currency thereof, entitle the holder of the privilege to occupy the land forming the course of the race or, as the case may be, the site of the dam, and also such other land as is specified in that behalf in the privilege. S11 Retention of right of priority – Every holder of a current mining privilege who holds...

7. [2017] NZEmpC 87 Below v The Salvation Army New Zealand Trust [pdf, 259 KB]

   ...pursue their dismissal grievance under the Act. 1 Below v The Salvation Army New Zealand Trust [2016] NZERA Wellington 111. Core facts [7] Evidence was presented in a variety of forms. The parties provided a helpful statement of agreed facts. Mr and Mrs Below gave evidence describing their background, and from their perspective, the circumstances of their cadetships. Captain Gerry Walker, Secretary for Personne...

8. [2017] NZEnvC 159 Hokio Trusts v Manawatu Wanganui Regional Council [pdf, 4 MB]

   ...would otherwise be the case. The Applicant contended (in summary): • That the Court broadly accepted the findings of the independent hearing panel; • That Appellants had failed to undertake a "hard-headed analysis,,6 which would have informed them that their case lacked merit in a number of respects and that they were at risk of costs; • There were changes to the Appellants' case during the course of the appeal NOE pages 317 - 328. NOE page 357. Applicant...

9. LCRO 240/2016 HM v NL (28 November 2018) [pdf, 255 KB]

   ...asked Ms NL to prepare an agreement setting out their arrangements for the joint purchase of the property.2 [14] In early July 2015 Ms NL drafted a basic property sharing agreement and forwarded it to Mr HM and Ms Z, indicating that more detailed information was required before it could be finalised. [15] Shortly after that, Mr HM and Ms Z fell out. On 7 July 2015 Ms Z emailed Ms NL and revoked Ms NL’s authority to deal with Mr HM in relation to the purchase. Ms Z also instruc...

10. [2018] NZEnvC 221 Giles v Auckland Council [pdf, 8.8 MB]

    ...COUNCIL Respondent Environment Judge JA Smith sitting alone pursuant to s 279 of the Act On the papers at Auckland Date of Decision: 'i 5 NOV 2il18 Date of Issue: DETERMINATION OF THE ENVIRONMENT COURT A: At the parties' joint request, and by consent, the Court allows the appeal and cancels the Council's decision of 25 July 2017. B: The consent to subdivision is granted subject to the plans and conditions to be amended as noted in this determination. Such cons...