Search Results

1. NT v HS [2020] NZDT 1312 (21 October 2020) [pdf, 270 KB]

   ...and, (iii) All implied conditions and warranties, guarantees, rights or remedies statutory or otherwise, including, but not limited to, any warranties of merchantability and fitness for a particular purpose are hereby excluded to the maximum extent permitted by law. (c) It is Your responsibility as a prospective Buyer to arrange for any veterinary inspection or inquiry that You may require and You assume all consequences and risk from failure to do so. CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 4...

2. Riley & Arnoux v REAA & Carpenter & Quin [2013] NZREADT 38 [pdf, 45 KB]

   ...they would not have purchased the property if they had known about the plans for subdivision. Other issues of complaint were raised before the Committee by the appellants but those are not now being pursued before us. The Basic Facts [4] The licences work for Acme Realty Ltd, trading as Ray White Birkenhead. On 15 April 2011 the appellants purchased a property at 49a Salisbury Road, Birkdale (the property) which was listed with Ray White. [5] The appellants state that an adjoinin...

3. WXY v Attorney-General (Strike-Out Application) [2014] NZHRRT 37 [pdf, 59 KB]

   ...responsibility for the well-being of their family members. (2) To achieve that purpose, this Act, among other things,— (a) prohibits the Crown or a DHB from paying a person for providing support services to a family member unless the payment is permitted by an applicable family care policy or is expressly authorised by or under an enactment: (b) declares that the Crown and DHBs have always been authorised, and continue to be authorised, to adopt or have family care policies that...

4. [2020] NZEnvC 101 Southland District Council v Chartres & Otherspdf [pdf, 744 KB]

   ...District held in Record of Title SL239/64. SOC V CHARTRES & OTHERS - INTERIM EO 2 (2) Prohibits the respondents from commencing any clearance, modification or removal of indigenous vegetation occurring at the Station except where it is permitted by Rule 810.1.1, including where that rule allows: (i) at 8101.1 (d), any clearance, modification or harvesting of indigenous vegetation which is required for the purpose of fencing areas of indigenous vegetation formally protected by t...

5. [2018] NZEnvC 105 Doig v Marlborough District Council [pdf, 1.5 MB]

   ...working days of the date of this decision . Any reply is to be made within a further five working days. For the court: J J M Hassan Environment Judge Annexure 1: 1. Finalised conditions. Annexure 1 Resource Consent U161037 A coastal permit to authorise foreshore structures fronting Lot 1 DP 433122 in Milton Bay comprising: a floating jetty and linkspan; a two storey boatshed; a boat launching ramp; a seawall, steps and decking, as modified by the following conditions: 1....

6. BORA Trade Marks (International Treaties And Enforcement) Amendment Bill [pdf, 309 KB]

   ...can be reasonable under the circumstances. Sections 134D and 134E balance these exigencies against the rights of individuals to be secure from unreasonable searches and seizures. The provisions limit searches to those places where the public is permitted. The provisions limit seizures only to items found in parts of the place open to the public and to situations where a reasonable belief exists that the items are evidence of an offence. Further, no search or seizure is conducted wit...

7. [2023] NZEnvC 234 Federated Farmers of New Zealand v Marlborough District Council [pdf, 987 KB]

   ...passing across a Significant Wetland. 6. Amend Rules 2.11.4, 2.11.5, 3.7.3, 3.7.4, 4.7.4 and 4.7.5 to read, as follows: [R] 2.11.4. Other than stock exclusion required by the Resource Management (Stock Exclusion) Regulations 2020, From 9 June 2022, permitting intensively farmed livestock to enter onto: (a) the bed of a lake; or (b) or the bed of a river when there is water flowing in the river, unless the stock are supervised and actively driven across the river, and do not cross...

8. 2021-03-14 Alexandra King - Evidence [pdf, 248 KB]

   IN THE ENVIRONMENT COURT OF NEW ZEALAND CHRISTCHURCH REGISTRY I TE KŌTI TAIAO O AOTEAROA ŌTAUTAHI ROHE ENV-2020-CHC-127 UNDER the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) IN THE MATTER of the Water Permits Plan Change - Plan Change 7, being part of a proposal of national significance directed by the Minister for the Environment to be referred to the Environment Court under section 142(2)(b) of the RMA AND IN THE MATTER of an application under section 149T of the RMA...

9. Brown v New Zealand Post Ltd (Recusal Application) [2016] NZHRRT 37 [pdf, 287 KB]

   ...no application connected or related to his affidavit because in his opinion he had filed enough documentation and there was no need for anything further to be filed. He continued to repeat the phrase that the Chairperson was not morally or legally permitted to be involved in any of his proceedings. [15] As to the application by NZ Post for particulars, Mr Brown said this application was “rubbish” and that his claim was clear, lucid and concrete. In response to a question from the...

10. Manuel v Carroll - Lot 1 Deposited Plan 5004 Part Waimarama 3A1A1 (2020) 83 Takitimu MB 41(83 TKT 41) [pdf, 231 KB]

    ...submissions [9] Mr Bidois, counsel for the applicant, filed detailed written submissions. He contended that Mr Carroll is neither an owner nor a whanaunga of one. Between October 2002 and October 2017, Mr Carroll occupied the land under a bare licence on the condition that he mow the lawns, pay the rates, and generally keep the property tidy and in good order. On 28 April 2017, Ms Manuel revoked that licence and requested that Mr Carroll vacate the land by 30 August 2017. A furthe...