Search Results

1. [2021] NZEnvC 075 Ngati Paoa Trust Board v Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga [pdf, 1.3 MB]

   ...have been disputed between them in other Courts about their mandate or their relative standing or priority. Ultimately, the law does not preclude any applicant for an authority from consulting with any person who may be able to give an informed response 4 Wellington International Airport Ltd v Air New Zealand [1993] 1 NZLR 671 (CA) at 674-676. Affirmed in New Zealand Pork Industry Board v Director-General of the Ministry for Primary Industries [2013] NZSC 154, [2014] 1 NZLR 477 at [16...

2. [2021] NZEnvC 160 Auckland Council [pdf, 609 KB]

   ...PC46 or withdrawing PC46 are not available as the Council has issued its decision on PC46. Clause 16 of Schedule 1 covers slips and omissions of minor effect and does not assist (it submitted) where there is procedural error.42 Submitters and responses to application 36 Memorandum dated 9 September 2021 at [28]. 37 Memorandum dated 9 September 2021 at [30]. 38 Memorandum dated 9 September 2021 at [22]. 39 Memorandum dated 9 September 2021 at [24]. 40 Memorandum dated 9 Se...

3. [2021] NZEnvC 160 Auckland Council [pdf, 609 KB]

   ...PC46 or withdrawing PC46 are not available as the Council has issued its decision on PC46. Clause 16 of Schedule 1 covers slips and omissions of minor effect and does not assist (it submitted) where there is procedural error.42 Submitters and responses to application 36 Memorandum dated 9 September 2021 at [28]. 37 Memorandum dated 9 September 2021 at [30]. 38 Memorandum dated 9 September 2021 at [22]. 39 Memorandum dated 9 September 2021 at [24]. 40 Memorandum dated 9 Se...

4. [2022] NZEnvC 252 Page v Whanganui District Council [pdf, 349 KB]

   ...an application lodged under s294 of the Resource Management Act 1991 (‘RMA’) for a rehearing of an application for an enforcement order that was the subject of a decision of the Environment Court in 2009 (‘the 2009 decision’).1 [2] In response to Mr Page’s application, the Council lodged two cross- applications: (a) to strike out Mr Page’s application for a rehearing under s279(4) of the RMA; and (b) for an order under s288C(2)(b) RMA restricting Mr Page from comme...

5. People charged and convicted of psychoactive substances offences December 2022 [xlsx, 97 KB]

   ...outcomes (where a person is found to be, or pleads, guilty) include 'convicted' and 'other proved' (Youth Court proved (s283 order), Discharge without conviction and Adult diversion/Youth Court discharge, Proven but not criminally responsible on account of insanity). - not proved outcomes include the person being found not guilty and where the charge is withdrawn or dismissed. - other charge outcomes include being found not guilty by reason of insanity, unfit to stand trial...

6. Rata v Rata - Takahiwai 5F1 [2023] Chief Judge's MB 60 (2023 CJ 60) [pdf, 262 KB]

   ...case of a beneficiary who is a person under disability, be entered into or made on his behalf by his trustee, if a trustee has been appointed under Part X hereof, and, if no such trustee has been appointed, may be entered into or made by any other responsible person. (4) After making such dispositions(if any) as in its discretion it thinks fit to make in accordance the foregoing provisions of this section, the Court, subject to the provisions of section one hundred and thirty-seven hereo...

7. Koha v Tatana - Succession to Winika Hāwe [2022] Chief Judge's MB 266 (2022 CJ 266) [pdf, 359 KB]

   ...Discussion [37] I am now required to weigh in the balance the Preamble, ss 2 and 17 of the 1993 Act. Those provisions make it clear that land is a taonga tuku iho and that as a person exercising functions under the 1993 legislation, I have a responsibility to facilitate and promote the retention of their lands by the owners, their whānau and hapū and their descendants. The facts of this case indicate that one of the blocks involved is a papakainga. [38] I note further that a...

8. Neemia v International Waste Ltd [2021] NZHRRT 32 [pdf, 182 KB]

   ...costs. Unless the parties come to an arrangement on costs the following timetable is to apply: [85.1] Interwaste is to file submissions as to the costs order it seeks within 14 days after the date of this decision. Mr Neemia’s submissions in response are to be filed within the 14 days that follow. Interwaste is to have a right of reply within seven days after that. [85.2] The Tribunal will then determine the issue of costs on the basis of the written submissions without further or...

9. [2022] NZACC 19 - McBryde v ACC (9 February 2022) [pdf, 453 KB]

   ...likely to have been consequential (in part at least) on injury sustained on 29 January 1994? Please explain with reference to any relevant evidence. Please see above. I think there is a reasonable probability that it was. 3. What is your response to Mr Howie and Mr Pai suggesting that a natural progression of degenerative changes was more likely than a traumatic cause of the calcification in the discs? None injury factors contribute to the risk of spinal disc herniation. Mr...

10. [2023] NZEnvC 025 Minister of Conservation v Marlborough District Council [pdf, 5.5 MB]

    ...Ngāti Koata Trust. [5] A Minute dated 30 January 2023 was issued affording a further opportunity to the above parties to seek leave to raise any opposition to, or issue with, the agreement of the parties sought to be endorsed by this order. No response was received. As a reminder, I record that if a party no longer has an interest in a topic or appeal it has a duty to formally withdraw its interest, as failing to do so can lead to delay and costs for other parties. [6] I am sat...