Search Results

1. [2024] NZEnvC 287 Port Taranaki Limited v New Plymouth District Council [pdf, 1.1 MB]

   ...corresponds with PREC12 - Port Precinct. 2. The extent to which the extension may limit, constrain or restrict any lawfully established port activities. 3. The adverse effects on opportunities for Ngāti te Whiti to exercise their customary responsibilities as mana whenua and kaitiaki in accordance with Policy PORTZ-P11. 4. The adverse effects on the values of scheduled and non- scheduled features, such as natural features and landscapes, waterbodies, indigenous biodiversity, h...

2. Fourth-Universal-Periodic-Review-documents_FINAL.pdf [pdf, 805 KB]

   ...compliance with the UN Convention Against Transnational Organised Crime. Modern Slavery 46 Public consultation on proposed legislation to address modern slavery and worker exploitation in supply chains occurred in 2022. This would create new responsibilities across the operations and supply chains of all types of organisations in New Zealand, with more responsibilities for larger organisations. The direction of work to progress proposals will be clarified in 2024. Climate C...

3. Talking about sentences & crime: views of people on periodic detention [pdf, 746 KB]

   ...considerations 8 2.5 Ethical issues 10 2.6 Selection of sites 11 2.7 Preparation for fieldwork 12 2.8 Interview team and training 12 2.9 Pilot study 13 2.10 Collection of data 13 2.11 Data collection instruments 14 2.12 Validity 15 2.13 Analysis 15 2.14 Response rate 16 3 Characteristics of the sample 17 3.1 Introduction 17 3.2 Response rate 17 3.3 Demographic characteristics 18 3.4 Criminal history 20 4 Perception of sentences 23 4.1 Relative sentence severity 23 4.1.1 Introduction 23 4.1.2...

4. [2009] NZEmpC AC 29/09 Ogilvy NZ Ltd v Whitten [pdf, 26 KB]

   ...which refers to a reply to Mr Patterson’s email of 6 April 2009. This reply from Ms Hornsby-Geluk was sent on 15 April 2009 and required urgent advice whether Ogilvy NZ was considering a challenge or an application for review. There was no response from Mr Patterson to that email. The respondent’s affidavit also sets out in some detail a letter from Mr Patterson dated 27 January 2009 to Ms Hornsby-Geluk, purportedly on a “without prejudice” basis, which set out certain ma...

5. Yasin & Anor v Hammadieh Sanctions decision [2015] NZIACDT 4 (04 January 2015) [pdf, 172 KB]

   ...shareholder or employee. As the licence holder, Mr Hammadieh was responsible for supervising them. Similarly, it does not alter Mr Hammadieh’s position because he was in the UAE more than the original information indicated. It was Mr Hammadieh’s responsibility to be in the UAE as much as necessary to manage, supervise and control his practice and the personnel in it effectively. [11] Furthermore, Mr Hammadieh cannot limit his liability to clients through the terms of a contract, or a...

6. Ly v Navarette-Scholes [2015] NZIACDT 16 (06 March 2015) [pdf, 88 KB]

   ...from the prescribed form is in reality founded on alterations that are in her own interests. [14] The submission includes a claim that the Registrar in preparing the Statement of Complaint failed to take adequate account of Ms Navarette-Scholes’s response to the complaint. I discuss that issue in the following section. Allegation of actual bias against the Registrar [15] Ms Navarette-Scholes contends through her counsel that the Registrar has: [15.1] Selectively used Ms Navarette-S...

7. FD v VG LCRO 127 / 2010 (2 September 2011) [pdf, 75 KB]

   ...responded adequately and in a timely manner to requests for information from his lawyer. [3] The Standards Committee did not uphold the complaints. The Committee’s decision traversed the background of the matter with reference to the detailed response that had been provided by the Practitioner. Reference was made to a dispute between the Applicant and his brother concerning dealings with some Trust assets, a dispute that had been determined in the High Court in February 2009. F...

8. Tweeddale v Pearson [pdf, 81 KB]

   ...$4,657.85. The Tribunal also accepted that concerning the Council’s responsibility, Mr Pearson and Ms Tucker were joint tortfeasors for failing to give attention to what was being done by their contractors. Mr Pearson and Ms Tucker were therefore found responsible for 20% of the Council’s responsibility. Liability of the fourth respondent, Mr Humphries – project manager There was little information about the physical work undertaken by Mr Humphries on site. Instead the Tribunal...

9. River Oaks Farm Ltd & Ors as Trustees of Ingodwe Trust v Olsson [pdf, 24 KB]

   ...outcome would still be the same Liability of Mr Olsson – Builder/Project Manager The Tribunal found that Mr Olsson undertook this project with an eye on the budget and at the same time striving to achieve an imposing building. He assumed the responsibility of the project management and supervision by taking on the role normally undertaken by an architect. By engaging Mr Jarman as a labour-only contractor, thus saving the supervision fees and margins payable when the builder is hire...

10. Nahu v Gorst - Whangawehi 1B3E (2006) 112 Wairoa MB 57 (112 WR 57) [pdf, 163 KB]

    ...as the chair of the t1l.lst illustrated through emails of her contempt of Mr Te Nahu (with no reason) and attempts to persuade tmstees not to attend meetings Mr Te Nahu called. • That Mrs Gorst does not have the qualities to be a p1l.ldent and responsible tmstee and neither does she have the SUppOlt of the majority of the Te Nahu whanau to be a p1l.ldent and responsible tmstee. Minute Book: 112 WR 61 [11] It should be noted that during the presentation of his evidence, !vIr He...