Search Results

1. LCRO 113/2013 AB v EF (3 August 2017) [pdf, 145 KB]

   ...had applied his mind to the question to be decided could have arrived at it”.5 In this regard he refers to the Wednesbury test for unreasonableness.6 [15] Mr AB is not specific as to his grounds for review, noting that he did “not have the resources currently or the time with recent severe illness to direct the LCRO to individual paragraphs from [his] complaint”.7 [16] His lack of specificity would justify a decision from this Office that is brief. In addition, Mr AB did no...

2. [2019] NZEmpC 63 Auckland Council v Drought [pdf, 279 KB]

   ...however, be restrained in deciding whether to hear a moot challenge. The reasons for this are, first, the importance of the adversarial nature of the process of determining appeals or challenges; second, the need for economy in the use of limited resources of the courts; and third, the responsibility of the courts to show proper sensitivity to their role in our system of Government. In general, advisory opinions are not appropriate.13 For these reasons, a decision to hear a moot ch...

3. Waitangi Tribunal Hearing Calendar (13 July 2018) [pdf, 434 KB]

   ...17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 Page | 4 – Updated 13 July 2018 1 Wai 2358 - The National Fresh Water and Geothermal Resources – Panel: Chief Judge Isaac; Crosby, R; Anderson, R; Phillipson, G; & Temara, P / Staff: Cameron, J; Hauraki, A; Moko-Mead, H; & Burke, C 2 Wai 2200 – Porirua Ki Manawatū – Panel Members: Judge Fox, Phillipson, G; Kidd, D; S...

4. [2021] NZEnvC 013 East Harbour Environmental Association Incorporated v Hutt City Council [pdf, 1.7 MB]

   BEFORE THE ENVIRONMENT COURT AT WELLINGTON I MUA I TE KOTI TAIAO O AOTEAROA KI TE WHANGANUI-A-TARA Court: Decision No. [2021] NZEnvC 13 IN THE MA TIER of an appeal under Clause 14 of the First Schedule to the Resource Management Act 1991 BETWEEN EAST HARBOUR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSOCIATION INCORPORATED (ENV-2016-WLG-000030) Appellant AND HUTT CITY COUNCIL Respondent Environment Judge B P Dwyer Environment Commissioner KA Edmonds Environment Commissioner DJ Bunting Date o...

5. Huata v Gotty - Lot 2 Deposited Plan 1996 (formerly Mangaroa 26N2 Block) (2021) 87 Takitimu MB 251 (87 TKT 251) [pdf, 248 KB]

   ...passage of time, and the lack of response to the application to transfer proceedings, I cannot determine whether Mr Huata and his counsel oppose the application to transfer the proceedings. [18] In summary, it is inefficient and a duplication of resources for proceedings concerning the same land and effectively the same parties to be heard in two separate Courts. Ample opportunity has been given to the parties to explore alternative dispute resolution and to provide further evide...

6. [2019] NZEmpC 68 Randle v The Warehouse Ltd [pdf, 248 KB]

   ...Green v Broadcasting Corporation of New Zealand [1988] 2 NZLR 490 (CA) at 505 per Casey J. [21] The evidence of The Warehouse was that there was no instruction given that people could not speak with Ms Randle. The former Regional Human Resources Business Partner for The Warehouse, who investigated the complaint against Ms Randle, gave evidence before the Authority and by affidavit in Court. She said that there was one point where she was contacted by employees who were co...

7. Grigorovich v Stapleton (Strike-Out Application) [2018] NZHRRT 44 [pdf, 234 KB]

   ...refusing to continue to employ me because of my ethnic/national origins”. [8] As noted earlier, by application dated 11 November 2016, Mr Stapleton and Babbage applied for an order that the proceedings be struck out. Unfortunately, the limited resources of the Tribunal have affected the ability of the Tribunal to hear and determine claims in a timely and efficient manner. There was considerable delay after the filing of the strike-out application before a procedural teleconference wa...

8. Rudd v The former trustees - Horowhenua 11 Part Reservation Trust and Horowhenua 11 (Lake) (2018) 392 Aotea MB 179 (392 AOT 179) [pdf, 345 KB]

   ...against the former trustees can proceed as planned at the November sitting. Mr Watson should therefore contact the case manager urgently and provide an update as to when his client’s evidence will be filed. It would not be a sensible use of resources to start Mr Rudd’s case on 21 November and then to have that adjourned because Mr Taueki’s evidence has been received late, which will have the flow on effect of impeding the filing of responses from the former trustees. [16] In...

9. Complaints Assessment Committee 403 v Zhang [2018] NZREADT 53 [pdf, 179 KB]

   ...for $550,000, and paid the deposit of $55,000. [3] Some two months later, Mr Yan advised Mr Zhang that there were many problems which made building on the property difficult (including the presence of large lava rocks), and that a different resource consent would be required from the one he had received from the vendor. Mr Yan said that he wanted to get out of the contract, and would rather lose his deposit than pay an unlimited amount later to build on the property. [4] At a...

10. The Crown Minerals (Decommssioning and other Matters) Bill [pdf, 175 KB]

    ...opinions of any kind and in any form. This right has been interpreted as including the right not to be compelled to say certain things or provide certain information.1 11. A number of clauses within the Bill provide that the Minister of Energy and Resources or the chief executive may require a permit or licence holders, and non-permit holders to disclose certain information. New sections compelling provision of information 12. New section 89ZA requires persons who hold a permit or l...