Search Results

1. EA v BO LCRO 237 / 2010 (29 September 2011) [pdf, 142 KB]

   ...event, from past dealings with Mr EA. [40] Mr EA wrote again, reiterating that Mrs EA was his spouse and employee. He made demand for information under the Privacy Act and took issue with a form at the back of ABO’s student handbook, citing the Human Rights Act as the grounds for his objection. He also provided an authority from Mrs EA to enable him to obtain personal information concerning her. This authority included the right for Mr EA to advocate on her behalf in various fo...

2. RM v LN LCRO 106 / 2011 (2 October 2012) [pdf, 121 KB]

   ...breach by RM of Rule 3.1 of the Conduct and Client Care Rules. [34] That Rule provides as follows A lawyer must at all times treat a client with respect and courtesy and must not act in a discriminatory manner in contravention of section 21 of the Human Rights Act 1993. [35] The Notice of Hearing dated 1 December 2010 advised that the issues raised by the alleged conduct included a) That RM did not keep to his estimate of costs and has overcharged LN for a poor standard of legal...

3. 2017 NZSSAA 064 (9 November 2017) [pdf, 244 KB]

   ...completed by or on behalf of the applicant and his or her spouse or partner (if any) to the chief executive’s satisfaction; and … [14] The Chief Executive also asserted that to the extent the Appellant and his wife took issue with Privacy and Human Rights issues, they were matters for the Privacy Commissioner and the Human Rights Commission. 5 The Appellant’s Position [15] As noted, the Appellant’s argument is largely responsive to the Chief Executive’s...

4. Mark Brown (filed 6 June 2017) [pdf, 2.1 MB]

   ...Blueskin Bay coastal features iii Structures Inappropriate siting, design, scale, density and finish of structures such that they become visually dominant from public viewpoints iv Other threats to visual quality  Roads and tracks 7  Human-made features 22. Removal or diminution of human-made features of significance such as historic shelter belts I assert that the wind turbine proposed to be sited on Porteous Hill, as well as the roadworks required for its instal...

5. [2021] NZEnvC 028 Goodwin v Wellington City Council [pdf, 990 KB]

   ...from the site does not exceed a reasonable level. 16. Work affecting archaeological sites is subject to a consent process under the Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga Act 2014. An archaeological site is defined as physical evidence of pre-1900 human activity. This can include above ground structures as well as below ground features. Below ground features can include burnt and fire cracked stones, charcoal, rubbish heaps including shell, bone and/or glass and crockery, ditches, banks,...

6. Pillay v New Zealand Transport Agency [2021] NZHRRT 13 [pdf, 179 KB]

   ...the NZTA, Vehicle Testing New Zealand (VTNZ), Mr Barlass who was the repair certifier and Bute Collision Repairs, who repaired the vehicle. 1 [This decision is to be cited as Pillay v New Zealand Transport Agency [2021] NZHRRT 13.] IN THE HUMAN RIGHTS REVIEW TRIBUNAL [2021] NZHRRT 13 I TE TARAIPIUNARA MANA TANGATA 2 [2] After the filing of the Disputes Tribunal claim, NZTA provided VTNZ with information relating to Mr Pillay on two occasions. The circumstances of these d...

7. Gravatt v Bulmer (Strike-Out Application) [2014] NZHRRT 40 [pdf, 81 KB]

   1 IN THE HUMAN RIGHTS REVIEW TRIBUNAL [2014] NZHRRT 40 Reference No. HRRT 004/2014 UNDER SECTION 50 OF THE HEALTH AND DISABILITY COMMISSIONER ACT 1994 BETWEEN GARY LANCE GRAVATT PLAINTIFF AND DAVID BULMER DEFENDANT AT AUCKLAND BEFORE: Mr RPG Haines QC, Chairperson Mr GJ Cook JP, Member Mr BK Neeson, Member REPRESENTATION: Mr GL Gravatt in person Mr WG Manning for defendant DATE OF DECISION: 1 September 2014 D...

8. TQ v FW LCRO 214/2015 (27 September 2016) [pdf, 64 KB]

   ...1 Evidence of TQ at review hearing. The company was represented by a lawyer in an employment dispute involving allegations of theft against Mr WA. The company subsequently retained the services of XX Services (XX), a human resources consultancy firm. 2 [4] Ms FW is Ms RT’s lawyer in family matters concerning her two children with Mr TQ (the children). [5] Ms FW also acts for Mr WA in an employment dispute that involves Mr TQ. [6] Mr TQ says

9. [2019] NZEnvC 077 Bunnings Limited v Queenstown Lakes District Council [pdf, 3.3 MB]

   ...putrescible, degradable or leachable components; • hazardous substances; • products or materials derived from hazardous waste treatment, hazardous waste stabilisation or hazardous waste disposal practices; • materials that may present a risk to human or animal health such as medical and veterinary waste, asbestos or radioactive substances; • liquid waste. Acceptable materials include bricks, pavers, masonry blocks, ceramics, un-reinforced concrete, reinforced concrete where a...

10. Director of Proceedings v Southern District Health Board [2020] NZHRRT 5 [pdf, 494 KB]

    (1) ORDER PROHIBITING PUBLICATION OF NAME OR IDENTIFYING PARTICULARS OF AGGRIEVED PERSON (2) ORDER PREVENTING SEARCH OF THE TRIBUNAL FILE WITHOUT LEAVE OF THE CHAIRPERSON OR OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE HUMAN, RIGHTS REVIEW TRIBUNAL [2020] NZHRRT 5 UNDER BETWEEN AND AT WELLINGTON BEFORE: Ms J Foster, Deputy Chairperson Dr SJ Hickey MNZM, Member Dr JAG Fountain, Member REPRESENTATION: Ms K Eckersley, Director of Proceedings Reference No. HRRT 045/2019 SECTION 50 OF THE HEAL T...