Search Results

1. LCRO 148/2023 ZJ v PE (16 June 2025) [pdf, 200 KB]

   ...affidavit evidence for the ex-wife containing similar phraseology and allegations to the previous affidavit evidence of his former partner. [7] The respondent did not dispute the factual course of events alleged by the applicant. The respondent’s response was, relevantly, that: (a) the ex-wife’s reference in her evidence to the former partner applying for a protection order against the applicant was fact and that the term “applied for” was used as opposed to the words “obta...

2. NZHC 349 28 February 2013 Therese Anne Sisson v The Standards Committee [pdf, 181 KB]

   ...grant of legal aid fully utilised. As recorded in our decision of 5 July, in the course of doing so, Ms Sisson misled and confabulated to whatever extent was required to achieve her ends. We recorded in our decision how she had failed to take responsibility for her actions and instead sought to blame or attack the conduct of others in the course of the defended hearing. [10] At the penalty hearing Ms Sisson stated that she accepted the findings of misconduct but submitted that...

3. [2024] NZEnvC 133 New Zealand Transport Agency - Waka Kotahi [pdf, 1.9 MB]

   ...decisions on the limited matters still at issue between the parties. The Hearing Process [20] After extensive mediation and expert conferencing very few submitters appeared before the Court. We have summarised submissions received and NZTA responses later in this decision. [21] During the hearing the Court indicated that it did not see any reason why it should not confirm the notices of requirement and grant the resource consents sought provided adequate conditions were set. We...

4. Geary v Accident Compensation Corporation [2013] NZHRRT 34 [pdf, 293 KB]

   ...is one in which it receives the closed evidence and the closed submissions in the absence of the party seeking access to the information. [34] As early as the second teleconference Mr Hunt indicated that he would be seeking a closed hearing. In response the Chairperson by Minute issued on 14 August 2012 explained the open and closed hearing process. Consequently, in advance of the hearing, ACC filed and served an open brief of evidence for Mr KT Seymour who is responsible for the unit...

5. 03-Appendix-Three-CEDF-Consent-Version.pdf [pdf, 27 MB]

   ...preliminary design and RMA processes. This is a tool to be refined in the next stages, to further embed the principles in the project. A central component of the project is the recognition that Iwi and Hapū have an inalienable connection with, and responsibility to Taiao, and its health and wellbeing. The partnership is committed to ensuring that because of this relationship the health and wellbeing of Te Taiao will be improved. This includes benefits for the wider ecosystem, the river...

6. CP v EH LCRO 19 / 2011 (12 November 2013) [pdf, 201 KB]

   ...of my usual fee. But in either case, I would need you to agree to cover the filing fee ($400) and the setting down and hearing fee which I believe is something in the order of $1,500. I would need to check. You would also have to accept sole responsibility for any costs award in the event of the appeal failing. The likely parameters are between $1,500 and $2,500. 7. Conversely, if your appeal succeeded, your husband would have an order for costs against him for $1,500 to $2,500,...

7. ENV-2016-AKL-000274 Rockfield Trust v KiwiRail Holdings Limited [pdf, 15 MB]

   ...of: 6300 and 6301 ; 6303 and 6304; 6304 and 6305. This detail needs to be provided before any changes to the boundaries of the deSignation can be recommended for confirmation. Note: This bullet point amended following the Requiring Authority's response and the Pre-hearing Meeting and Report of 16 September 2015. iii. A number of submitters including Housing New Zealand and Duncan McKenzie have requested that Designation 6303. Avondale to Southdown Railway Line, be removed from the...

8. LCRO 104/2019 RY v DN (1 May 2020) [pdf, 273 KB]

   ...DN’s contention that Ms RY’s contribution of $63,000 from the sale of her home, was to be bolstered by an advance to her of $70,000 from the EWs. The EWs were to secure this sum by taking a mortgage over their family home. Ms RY was to be responsible for servicing that mortgage. [95] Mr DN says that the money advanced by Mr EJ to assist the EWs with their contribution to the purchase, would have been gifted to the EWs had Ms EJ been acting in her own capacity, and not as attor...

9. LCRO 233/2018 VM v XZ (21 December 2020) [pdf, 700 KB]

   ...failed to plead a claim for disadvantage; and (k) XZ had subjected them to constant bullying during the course of the retainer; and (l) Attempts to obtain clarification on matters relating to invoices had consistently been met with a hectoring response. The summary above does not provide complete account of the concerns raised by VM, but covers the major concerns raised by them. The Standards Committee noted that VM had made over 20 separate complaints about XZ. From those compla...

10. [2022] NZEnvC 161 Hutt City Council [pdf, 2.6 MB]

    ...provide. The River/ink project - in brief [12] There are three public authorities and a corporate behind the Riverlink project. In no particular order they are the Wellington Regional Council (WRC - also referred to in some instances as GW or GWC) - responsible for the management of the river and its possible hazards, and for the supply and management of freshwater, wastewater and stormwater. It is 5 also responsible for the operation of the public transport network - with commu...