Search Results

1. [2024] NZEnvC 198 Middleton Family Trust v Queenstown Lakes District Council [pdf, 984 KB]

   ...issues from: (a) three landscape experts, each of whom has significant experience in respect to Wakatipu Basin, Ben Espie, Bridget Gilbert and Stephen Brown;12 (b) several lay witnesses called by the Society, whose evidence was entered by consent; and (c) four planning experts, similarly experienced in regard to the PDP and Wakatipu Basin variation, Nick Geddes (who authored the Middletons’ original PDP submission), John Kyle, Craig Barr and Ben Farrell.13 12 Mr Espie...

2. [2020] NZREADT 10 - Kettle (10 March 2020) [pdf, 155 KB]

   ...[8] In his subsequent complaint to the Authority, the complainant said that Mr Kettle had told Mr Weaver that he had appraised 5J at $695,000 and that the complainant had declined to list 5J with him as a result. He complained that Mr Kettle’s statement had had an adverse effect on negotiations for the sale of 5J. [9] There was some dispute as to what Mr Kettle said to Mr Weaver. Both Mr Platt (in statements to the Authority on behalf of Mr Kettle and the Agency), and Mr Walker...

3. Ron Lunken Family Trust v Haywood Construction Limited [2011] NZWHT Auckland 66 [pdf, 95 KB]

   ...for the broad proposal provided by Mr Lunken; selected the exterior cladding; liaised with the window designer to specify the design of the flashings; liaised with the contractor installing the glass balustrade; failed to get a producer statement for the liquid applied membrane on the roof or to ensure that this membrane was applied by an approved applicator; and failed to detect the construction defects when he was on site, in particular the lack of clearance between...

4. Staite v Greenville - Paeroa East 4B2C2 (2002) 264 Rotorua MB 132 (264 ROT 132) [pdf, 711 KB]

   ...bridge could quite simply have been built without any interference with the old bridge. It is said for McMillan that there is no specific evidence that he entered onto the land of the applicants. It appears that is right. In paragraph 9 of his statement of defense he says, lilt is admitted that the second respondent assisted the first respondent in the course and scope of his employment to recover certain parts of the bridge that belonged to the first respondent." The referen...

5. COES – EiC – P Murray (5 Feb 2021) [pdf, 530 KB]

   ...following submission: (a) Water quality and aquatic habitat in the Manuherikia has been steadily deteriorating. (b) The ORC’s current planning framework for managing water, particularly making decisions about transitioning deemed permits to RMA consents, is unfit for purpose. (c) Plan Change 7 is necessary as a holding mechanism while the ORC completes a planning framework that adequately meets the community’s aspirations for its rivers and that meets the NPS-FM. Submiss...

6. Dunstable v Leighton LCRO 73 / 2009 (14 July 2009) [pdf, 16 KB]

   ...replied on 11 November stating that he was referring the accounts to Mr X. He also noted that “we do have some funds in the event that there was a dispute of any kind and payment is able only to be made thereafter”. Mr Dunstable took this as a statement that funds for the purpose of payment of the invoices were held by Mr Leighton. Mr X did not consent to the invoices being paid. Mr Dunstable was of the view that Mr Leighton (or his firm) was properly responsible for payment of t...

7. Complaints Assessment Committee (CAC 409) v Ganesh NZREADT 19 [pdf, 327 KB]

   ...think now she bought the property, yes” and answered “no” to the question whether he had any involvement in the purchase of the property. He also said that Mrs Ganesh did not discuss Mogans- related business with him. [52] In his formal statement of evidence, dated 13 December 2017, Mr Ganesh set out details of Mogans’ purchase of the property, Mogans’ intentions regarding the property, Mrs Ganesh’s interactions with Gurkamal Singh, and the nomination to Gkamal. Howev...

8. [2018] NZEnvC 201 Granger v Clearwater [pdf, 2.1 MB]

   ...Applicants S R CLEARWATER, J A CLEARWATER AND B P HAILES AS TRUSTEES OF THE PENINSULA HOLDINGS TRUST STEVE CLEARWATER CONTRACTING LIMITED Respondents Court: Principal Environment Judge LJ Newhook sitting alone under s 279 RMA, with the consent of the parties Hearing: 11 October 2018 Appearances: A J Woodhouse for Applicants P J Page for Respondents M Garbett for Dunedin City Council Date of Decision: 12 October 2018 Date of Issue: 12 October 2018 DETERMINATION OF THE E...

9. [2024] NZEnvC 080 Digital Signs Limited v Auckland Council [pdf, 282 KB]

   ..._________________________________________________________________ A: The application is refused. B: There is no order as to costs. 2 REASONS Introduction [1] Digital Signs Ltd applies under s 310 of the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) for the following declaration: A resource consent is not required to erect domes and LED displays at 89 Gavin Street, Ellerslie, Auckland as per building consent plans BCO10367792. [2] Auckland Council opposes the making of this decl...

10. Ngati Whatua Orakei Whaia Maia Limited [pdf, 257 KB]

    ...wishes to be a party to these proceedings: • Panuku Development Ltd v Auckland Council (ENV-2018-AKL-000078) (the Appeal). 2. The proceedings are for direct referral to the Environment Court of an application under s87G RMA for resource consents for construction, occupation, use and maintenance of permanent and temporary infrastructure and undertaking of activities within the coastal marine area and on land associated with the America's Cup (proposal).1 3. Ngāti Wh�...