Search Results

1. [2016] NZSSAA 021 (31 March 2016) [pdf, 35 KB]

   ...good faith; (d) the beneficiary changed his position believing he was entitled to receive the money and would not have to repay it; and (e) it would be inequitable in all the circumstances, including the debtor’s financial circumstances, to permit recovery. Pursuant to s 86(9B) of the Act, the term “error” includes: (a) the provision of incorrect information by an officer of the Ministry; (b) an erroneous act or omission occurring during an investigation of benefit entitle...

2. [2018] NZLCDT 9 Auckland Standards Committee 2 v Name Suppressed [pdf, 157 KB]

   ...with investigating a complaint must be regarded as serious. It indicates a lack of candour that may be significant when considering the fitness of a practitioner to remain in the legal profession.” [26] It is axiomatic that if practitioners were permitted to make their own judgment about whether a complaint is worthy of response or investigation, the entire independent disciplinary process would break down. [27] Counsel for the Standards Committee submits that the level of culpabil...

3. Deliu v New Zealand Law Society and National Standards Committee (Second Recusal Application) [2013] NZHRRT 12 [pdf, 122 KB]

   ...the subjects to which they relate. It was submitted that counsel can refer to such documents in legal submission without the need for that evidence to be introduced through a witness. In the alternative, s 106(1)(d) of the Human Rights Act 1993 permitted the Tribunal to receive as evidence the information in the memorandum whether or not it would be admissible in a court of law. The memorandum concluded: 6 Counsel submits that the published documents referred to in the 21 March 2012...

4. Mr M v CAC 20004 & Lewin & Lewin [2013] NZREADT 63 [pdf, 89 KB]

   ...information must be the vendor themselves or their solicitor. As Wilde J said in Altimarloch Joint Venture Limited v Moorhouse & Others3 at paragraph 252: “Bayleys ought to have included accurate and complete information about the water permits in its sales information brochure, carefully checking that information with the Moorhouses and/or G W (the vendor’s solicitors) before issuing the brochure. I find Bayleys was negligent in not doing that.”

5. [2019] NZEnvC 036 Yaldhurst Joint Action Group v Christchurch City Council [pdf, 141 KB]

   ...commonality of objectives and policies for the majority of the rural zones. Such an approach appears to leave the outcomes for the different zones to be driven by the rules and this becomes problematic when consent is sought to do something that it not permitted under those rules .13 [19] I do not accept , however, the blanket submission that the City Council has failed to plan and provide for quarrying. The City Plan provisions, properly constructed, provided sufficient guidance on...

6. Territorial Authorities MW Twose Supplementary evidence on pRPS 21 July 2021 [pdf, 159 KB]

   ...rainwater retention and reuse for new development) could then be introduced as new land use controls via a district plan change. The relief proposed by the TA’s will mean that progress on this will begin sooner rather than later for the water permits affected by PC7. Issue 7: To what extent is PC7 consistent with the policy direction in the pORPS for community water supplies? 20. As a change to the Water Plan, PC7 does not give effect to the Te Mana o te Wai concept in the NPS...

7. [2015] NZSSAA 036, 18 May [pdf, 37 KB]

   ...received the payments of benefit in good faith; (d) the beneficiary changed her position believing she was entitled to receive the money; and (e) it would be inequitable in all the circumstances, including the debtor’s financial circumstances, to permit recovery. [23] Pursuant to s 86(9B) of the Act the term “error” includes: (a) the provision of incorrect information by an officer of the Ministry; 4 (b) an erroneous act or omission occurring during an investigation...

8. [2021] NZEnvC 023 Gibbston Vines Limited v Queenstown Lakes District Council [pdf, 6.1 MB]

   ...location Time Noise limits At any point within the notional At any time 55 dB LAeq (15 min) bounda1y of any residential unit .... Bird scmi11g devices [36] Rule 36.4.S specifies that sound (or noise) from "bird scaring devices" is a permitted activity. However, r 36.5.7 specifies several standards applicable, inter alia, to "The operation of audible devices (including gas guns, audible avian distress alarms and firearms for the purposes of bird scaring ... )"....

9. MQ v HQ [2021] NZDT 1659 (14 July 2021) [pdf, 99 KB]

   ...fails to comply, HQ is required to make a compensation payment to MQ for costs she will incur in arranging a contractor herself to complete the removal of the attachments. If this action is required, then I also make an order under s24(1)(k) FA to permit that contractor, if required, to have lawful access to HQ’s property to complete the removal. To avoid any doubt, the doors (and/or other materials) are to be removed from the fence by the contractor but are not to be removed from HQ�...

10. [2010] NZEmpC 63 The CE of the Open Polytechnic Of NZ v Halsey [pdf, 32 KB]

    ...that an employee eligible to be covered by the collective agreement will elect not to do so or, alternatively, to attempt to set binding terms and conditions of employment that will be inconsistent with the collective agreement if, as the statute permits, the employee elects to join the union after commencing employment. [17] There is no difficulty in the employer specifying for a 36 hour week by making this a condition of employment in respect of an employee who is not a...