Search Results

1. LCRO 197/2013 RN v WB (7 August 2017) [pdf, 134 KB]

   ...obtained that supports that view. Ms RN refers to a concession by Ms 3 DL at the JSC that was not consistent with her understanding of the advice she had received from her barristers on the s 13 claim. [11] Ms RN is unable to understand how the Judge’s view on litigation risk could be so different from the understanding she had from her barristers. Ms RN believes neither of her barristers acted in her best interests, did not act in a timely manner and failed to keep her ap...

2. LCRO 330/2013 PR v RW (17 July 2017) [pdf, 148 KB]

   ...the Crown witness was adequate; and whether the trial counsel had prior knowledge of the co-accused counsel’s closing remarks identifying Mr PR as the supplier of the drugs. It was noted the only ground of appeal available was whether the trial judge should have directed an inquiry of the two jurors supposedly known to Mr PR. In the circumstances, the Committee was satisfied that nothing in the material before it disclosed any unfairness and/or unreasonableness of the fees for the...

3. Consultation response report [pdf, 745 KB]

   ...a judicial officer. This change would help to keep the Secretary informed about potential quality concerns without being onerous for providers. Response 22. The Law Society supported the obligation to notify where a serious issue is raised by a judge about the competence of a provider. They noted the importance of ensuring the provider 4 understands what constitutes a “sanction”. The Law Society recommended that the obligation be clarified by including a definition of “sa...

4. LCRO 255/2016 WR v VB (4 March 2019) [pdf, 176 KB]

   ...difficult for a complainant to provide objective comment on what a fair and reasonable fee should be, and consequently it is not possible to be definitive as to what a complainant should produce to support a complaint about fee. Each case will have to be judged on its particular facts. [32] I have earlier noted that Mr VB restricted the basis for his billing to the time expended only, whereas r 9 of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008 provide...

5. [2019] NZEnvC 022 Fitzgerald v Kaikoura District Council [pdf, 1.8 MB]

   ...NZEnvC 22 of the Resource Management Act 1991 of an appeal pursuant to s 120 of the Act ANDREW FITZGERALD (ENV-2018-CHC-25) Appellant KAIKOURA DISTIRCT COUNCIL Respondent ALAN AND CHRISTINE GULLEFORD Applicants Court: Environment Judge J E Borthwick Hearing: In Chambers at Christchurch Date of Decision: 15 February 2019 Date of Issue: 15 February 2019 FINAL DECISION OF THE ENVIRONMENT COURT A: Subdivision consent and land use consent for an existing dwelling on Lot...

6. [2021] NZEnvC 035 The New Zealand Refining Company Limited v Whangarei District Council [pdf, 1.1 MB]

   ...First Schedule of the Resource Management Act 1991 THE NEW ZEALAND REFINING COMPANY LIMITED (ENV-2020-AKL-000 126) NEW ZEALAND TRANSPORT AGENCY (ENV-2020-AKL-000132) Appellants WHANGAREI DISTRICT COUNCIL Respondent Court: Environment Judge J A Smith sitting alone under section 279 of the Act Hearing: Last case event: Date of Decision: Date of Issue: On the papers 8 March 2021 1 7 MAR 2021 1 7 MAR 2021 DETERMINATION OF THE ENVIRONMENT COURT A: The Appeal po...

7. [2019] NZSSAA 40 (21 May 2019) [pdf, 189 KB]

   ...the Evidence Act 2006 does not assist XXXX in this case. 1 R v Alsford [2017] NZSC 42. 2 Practice Note – Police Questioning (s 30(6) of the Evidence Act 2006) [2007] 3 NZLR 297. 3 The provision appears to apply to the Authority, as a “judge” as defined in s 4 of the Evidence Act 2006 includes a tribunal. 4 Social Security Act 1964 (the Act), s 80A. 5 Section 12(1A) of the Act. 6 Section 12(2) of the Act. 6 [17] We recognise Marwood v Police7 is an author...

8. [2019] NZEnvC 134 Strategic Property Advocacy Network v Auckland Council [pdf, 328 KB]

   ...ADVOCACY NETWORK Appellant (ENV-2017-AKL-000167) AUCKLAND COUNCIL Respondent ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENCE SOCIETY INCORPORATED WAITAKERE RANGES PROTECTION SOCIETY INCORPORATED GM and J M YOUNG Section 27 4 parties Principal Environment Judge L J Newhook, sitting alone under s 279 of the Act In Chambers at Auckland Submissions: John Newick on behalf of the Strategic Property Advocacy Network Vanessa Evitt on behalf of Auckland Council Glen Young and James Young Douglas Allan...

9. [2020] NZEnvC 202 CEP Services Matauwhi Limited v Northland Regional Council [pdf, 336 KB]

   ...proposed Northland Regional Plan. CEP SERVICES MATAUWHI LTD (ENV-2019-AKL-111) ROYAL FOREST AND BIRD PROTECTION SOCIETY OF NEW ZEALAND INCORPORATED (ENV-2019-AKL-127) Appellants NORTHLAND REGIONAL COUNCIL Respondent Court: Members: Judge J A Smith Commissioner K Prime Commissioner R M Bartlett Hearing: Whangarei, Wednesday 25th November 2020 2 INTERIM REPORT OF THE ENVIRONMENT COURT TO THE MINISTER OF CONSERVATION AND THE NORTHLAND REGIONAL COUNCIL INCLUDIN...

10. Auckland Standards Committee 2 v Kennelly [2020] NZLCDT 6 [pdf, 143 KB]

    ...DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL [2020] NZLCDT 6 LCDT 012/19 and 024/19 IN THE MATTER of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 BETWEEN AUCKLAND STANDARDS COMMITTEE 2 Applicant AND PATRICK JAMES KENNELLY Respondent CHAIR Judge BJ Kendall (retired) MEMBERS Mr G McKenzie Ms N McMahon Prof D Scott Ms S Stuart DATE OF HEARING 19 December 2019 HELD AT Specialist Courts and Tribunals Centre, Auckland DATE OF DECISION 11 February 2020 COUNSEL Mr P Da...