Search Results

1. Annexure 2 - Scope Challenges [pdf, 281 KB]

   ...opportunity to participate, this will be a powerful consideration against finding the submission was on the plan change.20 Is the amended relief sought within the scope of the submission made? [16] It is not unusual for relief to be amended in response to evidence called by 16 Palmerston North City Council v Motor Machinists Ltd [2013] NZHC 1290 at [80]. 17 Palmerston North City Council v Motor Machinists Ltd at [81]. 18 Hawke’s Bay Fish and Game Council v Hawke’s Bay Regional C...

2. Central Standards Committee 3 v Hunt [2023] NZLCDT 12 (28 April 2023) [pdf, 278 KB]

   ...an 18 month suspension period in the absence of these mitigating features, we accept that he ought to be given credit for acknowledgement and acceptance of responsibility and therefore we considered that 15 months’ suspension is an appropriate response to this level of misconduct. [31] We also take account of the fact that this proceeding has been significantly delayed by factors outside Mr Hunt’s control, including that it took the Standards Committee 21 months to lay the cha...

3. 17.-Evidence-of-Mr-Nick-Keenan-Stormwater-Management-Design.PDF [PDF, 432 KB]

   ...receiving waterway). 8. Since the consent applications and NoRs were lodged: (a) I assisted with the response to questions in the section 92 further information requests from the Councils related to stormwater design. (b) I have assisted with responses to submitters who have raised stormwater concerns. 9. I have had discussions with my counterpart expert for HDC and KCDC, Ms Justine Bennett about the Stormwater Report and concerns they might have with it or the Project...

4. National Standards Committee 2 v Mr Q [2023] NZLCDT 14 (2 May 2023) [pdf, 213 KB]

   ...invites an odious comparison. Rather than deflecting to assess the character of the victim, we are more concerned to categorise the conduct of the practitioner. [23] Leaving aside the vexed area of comparing classes of victims, we note the victim responses differ in respect of the misconduct and these proceedings. Victim A cannot be described as a complainant even though she has sworn an affidavit for the Standards Committee. If Victim A had control of matters, she would have pu...

5. LCRO 28/2024 EB v FI (30 May 2024) [pdf, 190 KB]

   ...does not constitute more than a negligible risk of conflict of interest”. [51] Those comments are not directly pertinent to the outcome of the review application. This is because the complaint is against the respondent, not against the lawyer responsible for the advisory and witnessing process for the applicant’s EPAs, Ms XU. I nevertheless observe that the second statement is incorrect and the first is correct in principle but not necessarily applicable to the circumstances. [...

6. Wiri v Tuuta-Rurehe - Lot 62 DP 7991 Ruapani Ki Waikaremoana (2024) 127 Tairawhiti MB 199 (127 TRW 199) [pdf, 282 KB]

   ...tono nei Procedural History [10] On 23 January 2022 Dr Rapata Wiri filed an application for review of the Trust under s 231 of the Act and sought the removal of the current trustees. This application was referred to the current trustees for a response however the trustees did not provide any response. [11] On 30 August 2023, following a special general meeting on 29 July 2023, which included an election for trustee positions, an application was filed by Billie-Jo Beauchamp, Mar...

7. 20241003 Mental Health Bill [pdf, 246 KB]

   ...undertaken for a person to become subject to compulsory care. The required steps are: a. an examination by a mental health practitioner or clinical psychologist; b. a first assessment by a mental health practitioner; c. a second assessment by a responsible practitioner3 for a period of up to a maximum of 19 days, with formal reviews required no later than days 5, 12 and 19; and d. a mental health care order, either inpatient or community, given by the court. Reducing the use of r...

8. Research on the effectiveness of police practice in reducing residential burglary part 8 [pdf, 176 KB]

   ...51 6 Security measures before and after burglary 53 6.1 Security measures in place at the time of the burglary 53 6.2 Security advice from the Police 53 6.3 Changes made following burglary 54 6.4 Summary 56 7 General comments on burglary and Police response 57 8 Discussion 61 8 Appendix A Information sheet 63 Appendix B Interview guide for victim interview 65 9 Tables Table 2.1 Ethnicity of sample 18 Table 2.2 Household composition of sample 19 Table 2.3 Property arrangements of sa...

9. LCRO 181/2023 HC v QG and VO (28 February 2025) [pdf, 413 KB]

   ...He did not do so. [14] Early in 2020, the second respondent provided the forms signed by the other two former partners to the company and asked to be registered as the sole holder of “the firm’s” shareholding.4 Late in 2020, the person responsible for the [redacted] company’s administration notified the Companies Office of a transfer of the services partnership’s share parcel into the name of the second respondent. The primary reference to the 4 This did not reflect the...

10. National and Auckland Standards Committees v Orlov [2015] NZLCDT 3 [pdf, 163 KB]

    ...NZCA 230. 3 See footnote 1 at [67]-[69]. 5 [68] In relation to prejudice, the Tribunal was not satisfied with that a fair hearing would no longer be possible, due to the passage of time. The Tribunal noted the extent of Mr Orlov’s response in support of his interlocutory applications, noting that he had “detailed recall and indeed delivered his position in his standpoint to the Tribunal with significant vigour”. As counsel for the Standards Committee observed, this obs...