Search Results

1. ENV-2016-AKL-000TBA Wallace Group Limited v Auckland Council [pdf, 2 MB]

   ...mitigation burden falls upon the abutting WGL property if the MHS zoning is imposed. (t) Given the surrounding and abutting zonings, a Light Industrial zoning for the northern portion of the Site is the better and more appropriate zone. If some form of Residential zoning were to apply to the northern portion of the Site, then management and mitigation of interface effects and potential reverse sensitivity issues should be managed or mitigated on the Site to avoid adverse impa...

2. LCRO 77/2020 MP v RJ (30 July 2020) [pdf, 194 KB]

   ...had regarding what he perceived to be Mr RJ’s failure to meet discovery obligations in the District Court. [11] The Standards Committee identified the elements of Mr MP’s complaint as being: (a) complaint that Mr RJ had failed to respond to requests to provide information; and (b) complaint that Mr RJ had indulged in misleading and deceptive conduct by failing to comply with his client company’s disclosure obligations; and (c) complaint that Mr RJ had threatened him with d...

3. O'Reilly v Registrar of the Real Estate Agents Authority [2016] NZREADT 78 [pdf, 172 KB]

   ...cancelled Mr O’Reilly’s licence, effective from 7 September 2016. Background Mr O’Reilly’s application to renew his licence [2] Mr O’Reilly has been a licensed salesperson since 2007. On 22 January 2016, he completed an online application form to renew his licence (“the renewal application”). Mr O’Reilly was required to answer a number of questions set out on the application form. These included the following questions, both of which Mr O’Reilly answered “NO...

4. XN v Ji [2019] NZIACDT 67 (1 October 2019) Sanctions [pdf, 186 KB]

   ...2019 seeks compensation for the loss the complainant has suffered. [16] Mr Chen observes that the application for residence was declined because the complainant did not provide evidence as to how she had acquired all of her nominated funds, as requested by the immigration officer. It is contended that the complainant had not been aware that this information had been requested. This occurred because the application was not undertaken by Mr Ji but instead the work was given to unq...

5. LCRO 185/2018 GT v NE (16 July 2019) [pdf, 206 KB]

   ...Credit Contracts Act. 5 Declaration of insolvency [25] In his response Mr NE does not refer to making a “declaration”. He advised that he had “more than 25 years’ experience of advising directors, liquidators and receivers” and had formed the view that the Company was insolvent. Mr NE provided the figures he relied on to form that view. His response was detailed. The $1.3m payment [26] Mr NE believes that the first time he was made aware of Mr GT’s “view” th...

6. [2019] NZEnvC 194 Auckland-Council v Imperial Homes Norwest Limited [pdf, 577 KB]

   ...Pickwick notice and required the Council to serve Imperial Homes with its application. 2 [6] A judicial conference was convened on 22 May 2019. Counsel for Imperial Homes indicated that the matter could be resolved without the need for a hearing and requested that a further judicial telephone conference be convened on 24 May 2019 to review the position.3 1 Memorandum of counsel for the Council dated 17 May 2019 paragraph [25). 2 Minute dated 20 May 2019. 3 Minute issued 23 May 201...

7. X Ltd v U Ltd [2023] NZDT 335 (1 March 2023) [pdf, 242 KB]

   ...oral. 5. In contract disputes, there is a legal rule called the Parol Evidence Rule. The Parol Evidence Rule says that extrinsic evidence, including discussions and negotiations that occurred prior to entering into a written contract should not form part of a contract which is in written form. This is on the basis that the terms of a written, and signed, contract should be able to be relied on by parties as setting out their rights and obligations under a contract. However, in limited...

8. OIA-112091.pdf [pdf, 1.9 MB]

   Justice Centre | 19 Aitken Street DX SX10088 | Wellington T 04 918 8800 | F 04 918 8820 ContactUs@justice.govt.nz | www.justice.govt.nz 10 June 2024 Our ref: OIA 112091 Tēnā koe Official Information Act request: Protection and Parenting Orders Thank you for your email of 10 May 2024 requesting under the Official Information Act 1982 (the Act), information regarding without notice protection and parenting orders. Specifically, you requested: I wou...

9. LCRO 131/2024 RD v PS (28 January 2025) [pdf, 179 KB]

   ...parties. [15] I had formed a provisional review that this was the most appropriate hearing process and sought comments from the parties. The respondent had no objection. The applicant sought a hearing in person and provided written reasons for his request. [16] I decline the applicant’s request. In doing so, I acknowledge the genuineness of the applicant’s concerns about his late father’s financial and property interests and the transactions discussed in the first LCRO decisi...

10. LCRO 36/2023 TL v RY and SK (4 July 2024) [pdf, 180 KB]

    ...the Crown Prosecutor’s Guidelines 2013 (the Guidelines) was met but that the public interest test was not met and that prosecution should not proceed. [6] On 3 December 2014, Mr Y reviewed her recommendation and the file, met with the Police and formed the opinion that both tests were met but that the alleged offending was low-level (although both were category 3, indictable offences). [7] On 23 December 2014, Mrs X emailed the applicant’s lawyer, copying in Mr Y, relevantly statin...