Search Results

1. [2006] NZEmpC WC 13/06 Griffith v Sunbeam Corp Ltd [pdf, 179 KB]

   ...request to write a letter in particular terms without verifying for himself that it was true. Principles [115] The principles to be applied in determining whether Mr Griffith’s dismissal was justifiable are those enunciated by the Court of Appeal in W & H Newspapers Ltd v Oram [2000] 2 ERNZ 448. The key principles are those set out in the following paragraphs: [31] While in a breach of contract case an employee alleging wrongful dismissal must establish to the satisfaction...

2. [2021] NZEnvC 175 Shaw v Hamilton City Council [pdf, 2.5 MB]

   ...conditions, was issued on 24 October 2014. Mr Shaw gave evidence at the hearing. The Commissioners did not elect to impose a condition requiring an underpass as requested by the Shaws in their submission.20 The Commissioners’ decision was not appealed by the Shaws. The sole appeal was received from a directly affected landowner on a site-specific severance matter, not in relation to the East-West Minor Arterial alignment that affects the Shaw property. That appeal was resol...

3. [2023] NZEnvC 198 Stilwell v Opotiki District Council [pdf, 8.3 MB]

   G & S Stilwell v Ōpōtiki District Council IN THE ENVIRONMENT COURT AT AUCKLAND I TE KŌTI TAIAO O AOTEAROA KI TĀMAKI MAKAURAU Decision [2023] NZEnvC IN THE MATTER OF an appeal under section 120 of the Resource Management Act 1991 BETWEEN G & S STILWELL (ENV-2022-AKL-000212) Appellants AND ŌPŌTIKI DISTRICT COUNCIL Respondent Court: Chief Environment Court Judge D A Kirkpatrick sitting alone under s 279 of the Act Last case event: 6 September 2023 Date o...

4. [2023] NZEnvC 097 Amisfield Environment Protection Group v Central Otago District Council [pdf, 21 MB]

   IN THE ENVIRONMENT COURT AT CHRISTCHURCH I TE KOTI TAIAO O AOTEAROA KI OTAUTAHI IN THE MA TIER AND BETWEEN AND AND AND Decision No. [2023] NZEnvC 97 of the Resource Management Act 1991 an appeal under s 120 of the Act AMISFIELD ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION GROUP (ENV-2022-CHC-22) Appellant CENTRAL OTAGO DISTRICT COUNCIL First Respondent OTAGO REGIONAL COUNCIL Second Respondent CROMWELL CERTIFIED CONCRETE LIMITED Applicant Environment Judge J E Borthwick -...

5. [2024] NZEnvC 025 Shundi Queenstown Limited v Queenstown Lakes District Council [pdf, 2.6 MB]

   IN THE ENVIRONMENT COURT AT CHRISTCHURCH I TE KOTI TAIAO O AOTEAROA K IOTAUTAHI Decision No. [2024] NZEnvC 25 IN THE MA TIER of the Resource Management Act 1991 AND an appeal under s120 of the Act BETWEEN SHUNDI QUEENSTOWN LIMITED AND Court: Hearing: Appearances: Last case event: Date of Decision: Date of Issue: (ENV-2020-CHC-85) Appellant QUEENSTOWN LAKES DISTRICT COUNCIL Respondent Environment Judge J J M Hassan Environment Commissioner J T Baines 14 J...

6. LCRO 236/2020 TB - Application for review of a prosecutorial decision (13 December 2021) [pdf, 580 KB]

   ...review [108] The nature and scope of a review was discussed by the High Court in 2012, which said of the process of review under the Act:10 [39] … [T]he power of review conferred upon Review Officers is not appropriately equated with a general appeal. The obligations and powers of the Review Officer as described in the Act create a very particular statutory process. [40] The Review Officer has broad powers to conduct his or her own investigations including the power to exercise...

7. [2023] NZEnvC 007 Ravenswood Developments Limited v Waimakariri Distrrict Council [pdf, 1.1 MB]

   RAVENSWOOD DEVELOPMENTS LIMITED v WAIMAKARIRI DISTRICT COUNCIL IN THE ENVIRONMENT COURT AT CHRISTCHURCH I TE KŌTI TAIAO O AOTEAROA KI ŌTAUTAHI Decision No. [2023] NZEnvC 7 IN THE MATTER of the Resource Management Act 1991 AND an appeal under Clause 29 of Schedule 1 of the Act on Private Plan Change 30 to the Waimakariri District Plan BETWEEN RAVENSWOOD DEVELOPMENTS LIMITED (ENV-2022-CHC-001) Appellant AND WAIMAKARIRI DISTRICT COUNCIL Respondent Environment Judge J...

8. Barlow v Phillips - Rangitoto Tuhua 55B1B and other blocks (2012) 282 Aotea MB 75 (282 AOT 75) [pdf, 419 KB]

   ...general land. When the application was dismissed, the plaintiffs applied for a rehearing and a determination that they were the owners of the land. The MLC dismissed the latter application and adjourned the rehearing application. The plaintiffs appealed and the Māori Appellate Court dismissed the appeal and determined that a status order declaring the land to be Māori freehold land should be registered against the title in the Land Transfer Office. That order was subsequently...

9. Nukutere Lands Trust v Trustees of Whitikau A1 – Opape 28 (2013) 70 Waiariki MB 272 (70 WAR 272) [pdf, 1.4 MB]

   ...these were vested in the Whakatōhea Māori Trust Board as responsible Trustee5. The blocks were Opape 236 and Opape No 12P7. 1 NZ Gazette, 1866, No 3, p17 2 NZ Gazette, 1866, pp 347-348 3 (2010 APPEAL 12) - (PDF, 210 KB) 4 See also Faulkner v Tauranga District Council [1996] 1 NZLR 357 5 69 Ōpōtiki MB 184 (69 OPO 184); 68 Ōpōtiki MB 199 (68 OPO 199). 6 Opape 23 containing 5092.943 hectares situated in Blocks VI, VII, IX, X, X...

10. 20240806-FINAL-Proactive-Release-Sentencing-Reform-Tranche-One.pdf [pdf, 2.1 MB]

    ...potentially requiring thousands of additional prison beds within the next 5 – 10 years; 5.2. increase court delays as a result of more complex sentencing arrangements that could increase adjournments and the length of hearings; 5.3. increase appeals, legal challenges and compensation for breaches of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 (NZBORA). 6. We have identified some preliminary options to address these issues and deliver on the Government’s objective of restoring law and...