Search Results

1. 2022-02-11 ORC - MOC - in relation to the scope for relief sought by Mr Cocks [pdf, 205 KB]

   ...not, in the Council’s opinion, asking the Court to make changes to PC1 outside the scope of PC1 or the submissions on it. Legal principles relevant to scope 4 In making a decision on PC1, the Environment Court must (relevantly) apply clause 10(1) to (3) of Schedule 1 as if it were a local authority.1 5 Clause 10 of Schedule 1 of the RMA provides for the making of decisions on provisions and matters raised in submissions. In giving its decision on the provisions of PC1 and any m...

2. KC v LF LCRO 046/2012 (21 November 2014) [pdf, 51 KB]

   ...sanction. [49] Importantly, the legislation does not provide that a breach of the Rules must result in a penalty being imposed. That approach, if followed, would overlay the 4 Hamed v R [2011] NZSC 101, [2012] 2 NZLR 305. 9 disciplinary process with a rigidity and inflexibility that is not sanctioned by the legislation. [50] After receiving a complaint, the Standards Committee may, at first step, exercise its discretion to t...

3. Couch - Rapaki Māori Reservation 875 Part Sec 6A & Sec 6B1B2C (2016) 37 Te Waipounamu MB 129 (37 TWP 129) [pdf, 205 KB]

   ...APWH 157) at 161. 7 Wainui 2F4D, above n 4, at [28]. 8 Te Whata, above n 1, at [20]; Cleave – Orokawa 3B, above n 1, at 100-102; Wainui 2F4D, above n 4, at [8]; Ngarara West B3B, above n 4, at [29]. 9 Cleave – Orokawa 3B, above n 1, at 101-102; Te Whata, above n 1, at [37]. 10 Wainui 2F4D, above n 4, at [28]. 11 Te Whata, above n 1, at [17]. 12 Ngarara West B3B, above n 4, at [45]; Te Whata, above n 1, at [51]. 37 Te Waipounamu MB 134 land as they wish, a...

4. [2023] NZEnvC 001 Swap Stockfoods Limited v Bay of Plenty Regional Council [pdf, 3.6 MB]

   ..................................................................................................... 100 H11 New activities and relocation of existing activities within the Mount Maunganui Airshed .................................................................................... 101 H12 Inclusion of “noxious or dangerous” in a general standard ................. 101 H13 Responsibility for preparing dust management plans and the definition and roles of Suitably Qualified and Experie...

5. IP v SI and SH 179 / 2010 and 180 / 2010 (27 February 2012) [pdf, 102 KB]

   ...view is that the letter sent to him by the Practitioner is a sufficient basis for an adverse finding to be made. [24] Rule 10 states: 10. A lawyer must promote and maintain proper standards of professionalism in the lawyer’s dealings. 10.1 A lawyer must treat other lawyers with respect and courtesy. [25] Litigation in an adversarial legal system by its nature, often involves vigorous exchanges between the lawyers for opposing parties and it is not uncommon that a lawyer w...

6. ENVC Hearing 6Oct14 s274 evidence chief Anthony King-Turner [pdf, 98 KB]

   ...over a much longer time frame. The use of an overhead camera and automated traffic counter would have achieved a reliable robust result. Hence his deductions are statistically flawed. 33. I disagree with Mr Mitchell’s statement in paragraph 101 that “the new (marina) parking area and associated traffic is likely to have little effect.” He has not taken into account the effects the marina and its associated traffic will have in the future when there will likely be a need fo...

7. People remanded on bail or at large and offending on bail or at large December 2018 [xlsx, 281 KB]

   ...Other fraud and deception offences Dishonest conversion 14 15 11 45 33 5 10 8 10 5 09: Fraud, deception and related offences 099: Other fraud and deception offences Other fraud and deception offences, nec 10 2 2 5 0 0 0 1 1 0 10: Illicit drug offences 101: Import or export illicit drugs Import or export illicit drugs nfd 10 42 58 5 16 3 2 1 22 5 10: Illicit drug offences 102: Deal or traffic in illicit drugs Deal or traffic in illicit drugs nfd 684 623 575 571 674 481 471 583 550 505 10: Il...

8. [2022] NZEmpC 232 Kang v Saena Company Ltd [pdf, 249 KB]

   ...Relevant to the present case is the observation made by the full Court in Fagotti that there is significant value in a commonly applied, and well published, notional daily rate for costs in the Authority.21 19 Rangitaawa-Kaui v UBP Ltd [2022] NZERA 101 at [11]. (The Authority did award an extra 0.25 for submissions lodged after the meeting, but there is no indication, at least in the determination, that this is commonplace). 20 PBO Ltd (formerly Rush Security Ltd) v Da Cruz [20...

9. VM v ND & HB LCRO 249/2012 (30 November 2015) [pdf, 329 KB]

   ...Committee’s view it would be going too far to criticise Ms HB for not having ensured that Mr ND did so, or that he did so in appropriate terms. She was entitled to assume that Mr ND would attend to those responsibilities and obligations appropriately. 101. Accordingly the Committee makes a determination to take no further action in respect of the complaint against Ms HB, pursuant to s 152(2)(c) of the Act. 1 Standards Committee deter...

10. [2021] NZEnvC 182 Country Lifestyles Limited v Auckland Council [pdf, 221 KB]

    ...Epsom Residential Protection Society Incorporated v Auckland Council [2021] NZEnvC 68. 2 Above n 1. 3 Mawhinney (as Trustee) and the Trustees of the Waitakere Forest land Trust and the Trustees of Forest Trust v Auckland Council [2017] NZEnvC 162 at [101] to [105]. 4 appropriate for the Court to consider afresh the Council’s decision to return CLL’s application under ss 88(3) and 88(3A) of the RMA as incomplete (on the basis of the information that was before the Council’s...