Search Results

1. [2020] NZEmpC 167 Noble v Ballooning Canterbury.com Ltd [pdf, 287 KB]

   ...A detailed assessment of scale costs was provided. Under Category 2, the range was from $45,540 (Band B) to $67,540 (Band C). On a Category 3 basis, the range was from $68,310 (Band B) to $101,310 (Band C). [36] No submissions were filed in response by Mr Noble, Mr Towner confirming that his lawyers had not received instructions from him to do so. Analysis [37] The Court’s jurisdiction to order costs arises under cl 19 of sch 3 of the Act. The Court’s Guideline Scale pro...

2. Te Manutukutuku Issue 38 [pdf, 5.7 MB]

   ...Waitangi Tribunal reports became available free of charge from Monday 12 August, via the reports data­ base on the Tribunal's world wide web homepage. This development, which allows immediate access to claimants and researchers, comes in response to in­ creasing demand for access to the Tribunal's reports, both from within New Zealand and from overseas, and has been made possible by substantial spon­ sorship. In just the first week since the database became freely avail...

3. Te Manutukutuku issue 75 [pdf, 7.6 MB]

   ...the Crown and the parties. The Tribunal directed the Crown and the claimants to inform the Tribunal of the progress of these dis- cussions by 20 January 2020. The Tribunal has reserved the right to issue further recommendations in light of the responses from parties. The Tribunal understands that some talks between parties have begun, and the outcome of this process will be covered in a future issue of Te Manutukutuku. The Health Services and Outcomes Kaupapa Inquiry panel compr...

4. Rihari v Auckland - Takou (2021) 240 Taitokerau MB 42 (240 TTK 42) [pdf, 309 KB]

   ...order). Had the trustees failed to address these issues I would have taken a different view. They may well have been unsuitable to continue in office and removal may have been necessary for the proper execution of the trust. However, they took the responsible approach of accepting, and then addressing, these failures. [84] I also take into account that the trustees have maintained the support of the owners. At the 2019 AGM a resolution was moved for all trustees to stand down....

5. 1. JWS 1 - Primary Sector Part B - Animal Waste Storage 8-9 June 2021 [pdf, 405 KB]

   ...outcomes sought? 62. All witnesses agree that the objectives of a management plan for an animal effluent system should be to: a. record the preventative measures to be taken to minimise the risk of unauthorised discharges, and b. record the responses to be taken in the event of an unauthorised discharge. 63. The technical and planning witnesses agree that, at minimum, the management plan should contain: a. operational procedures for using and maintaining the system, b. re...

6. Turner v Itchyfoot Pty Ltd [2021] NZHRRT 27 [pdf, 198 KB]

   ...an individual if, in relation to an information privacy request made by the individual,— (a) the action consists of a decision made under Part 4 or Part 5 in relation to the request, including— (i) a refusal to make information available in response to the request; or … (b) the Commissioner or, as the case may be, the Tribunal is of the opinion that there is no proper basis for that decision. [34] As is evident from s 66(2)(a)(i) and s 66(2)(b), information requested but not...

7. [2022] NZEnvC 229 Wilson v Waikato Regional Council [pdf, 1.2 MB]

   ...prerequisite to an effective adaptive management approach. Rather, adaptive management conditions serve to ensure 38 39 40 Opening submissions for the appellant, dated 4 May 2022, at [60]. Sustain OttrSounds referring to [133(c)]. Refer responses to questions 7, 8, 13 and 14 of the JWS Planning. 16 risks are minimised. [39] Ms Mackintosh also points out that it would be open to the Council to review the conditions and cancel the consent should the conditions fail to &quot...

8. Auckland Standards Committee 2 v Brill [2022] NZLCDT 3 (21 January 2022) [pdf, 557 KB]

   ...role of an in-house lawyer from a lawyer in private practice and went on to discuss the “strong public policy reasons for the prohibition” against providing services to anyone else other than the practitioner’s employer. [20] Finally, in response to a query, Mr Brill was advised on 17 March 2016 that there were two modes of practice namely, employed and practice on own account. He was advised that Law Society records indicated he was not approved to practice on own account...

9. [2021] NZACC 114 - Stalmann v ACC (3 August 2021) [pdf, 267 KB]

   ...respondent investigated the claim, seeking the clinical records from Mid Central Health as well as comment from Mr Rhind in respect to the claim. [9] The clinical records were subsequently supplied to the respondent. Mr Rhind provided a response on 11 March 2015 in respect of his treatment in 2008. He noted that a “lower midline incision was made and an appendectomy performed”. [10] He stated that Mrs Stalmann was discharged on 14 September 2008 and said: After any su...

10. [2023] NZREADT 15 – Wilson v CAC 2102 & EE [pdf, 230 KB]

    ...purchaser had built a second building and been issued with resource consent permitting subdivision of the property. The downstairs area could no longer be used for commercial purposes. Ms Wilson submits that such post purchase plan changes are not the responsibility of a licensee. [36] According to Ms Wilson, there were no notices from the council to cease use of the bathroom or kitchen. The LIM report showed the downstairs area was consented and it still is. Recently, the property...