Search Results

1. 03-Appendix-Three-CEDF-Consent-Version.pdf [pdf, 27 MB]

   Hokio Beach Waitarere, Waitarāra Beach Kāpiti IslandKāpiti Island Te Whanganui a TaraTe Whanganui a TaraAorangi RangeAorangi Range Remutaka RangeRemutaka Range Te WaipounamuTe Waipounamu Punahau/Lake Punahau/Lake HorowhenuaHorowhenua Lake Waiwiri/ Lake Waiwiri/ Papaitonga Papaitonga ReserveReserve Ohau RiverOhau River Ōtaki RiverŌtaki River Waikawa BeachWaikawa Beach Tararua RangeTararua Range Waitohu StreamWaitohu Stream Manakau StreamManakau Stream Waiauti Waiauti

2. Arthur v Accident Compensation Corporation (Vocational Independence) [2023] NZACC 36 [pdf, 253 KB]

   ...October 2012, Mr Arthur’s surgery proceeded. Post-surgical reporting from Mr Tasman-Jones was positive. Mr Arthur was subsequently referred to a hand 3 therapist for a wrist splint, a gradual strengthening programme and for pain management services. [10] On 15 December 2012, an Initial Occupational Assessment (“IOA”) was undertaken by Ms Irene Taylor. She noted that Mr Arthur left school following sixth form and commenced, but did not complete, a building apprenticesh...

3. LCRO 213/2015 HY Trust v AK and GJ (21 Janaury 2019) [pdf, 286 KB]

   ...involves the LCRO coming to his or her own view of the fairness of the substance and process of a Committee’s determination. Discussion [56] It is relevant to note at the outset that s 4 of the Act says that every lawyer who provides regulated services must, in the course of practice, comply with four fundamental obligations, the first of which is to uphold the rule of law and to facilitate the administration of justice in New Zealand. The other three impose obligations on lawy...

4. [2020] NZEmpC 13 Elisara v Allianz New Zealand Ltd [pdf, 223 KB]

   IN THE EMPLOYMENT COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND I TE KŌTI TAKE MAHI O AOTEAROA TĀMAKI MAKAURAU [2020] NZEmpC 13 EMPC 307/2017 IN THE MATTER OF a challenge to a determination of the Employment Relations Authority AND IN THE MATTER OF an application for costs BETWEEN TITIIMAEA EUGENE ELISARA Plaintiff AND ALLIANZ NEW ZEALAND LIMITED Defendant Hearing: On the papers Appearances: S Worthy and HG...

5. Tau v Tahere - Rangihamama X3A (2016) 137 Taitokerau MB 68 (137 TTK 68) [pdf, 494 KB]

   137 Taitokerau MB 68 IN THE MĀORI LAND COURT OF NEW ZEALAND TAITOKERAU DISTRICT A20130002088 UNDER Section 18(1)(a), 19 and 20(d), Te Ture Whenua Māori Act 1993 IN THE MATTER OF Rangihamama X3A and Omapere Taraire E (Aggregated) BETWEEN RANIERA TE TEINGA SONNY TAU, BRUCE ARNOLD CUTFORTH, TAOKO WIHONGI, TE TUHI ROBUST AND COLLEEN BIRMINGHAM- BROWN AS TRUSTEES OF THE OMAPERE TARAIRE E AND RANGIHAMAMA X3A AHU WHENUA TRUST Applicants

6. [2021] NZEnvC 034 Coneburn Preserve Holdings Limited v Queenstown Lakes District Council [pdf, 3.9 MB]

   ...involved in the development of the zone since its inception. The Schrantzes own Lot 35 in the Preserve at Jacks Point and have consent to build there,2 while :rvir Fong owns six undeveloped Preserve Homesite lots in the vicinity of where some of the new proposed Homesites would be located. The appeals were all allocated to Topic 22 and parties took part in court-facilitated ADR.3 A number of s274 parties joined the appeals but only three made an appearance at hearing. Background...

7. VT Ltd v BN [2020] NZDT 1535 (30 April 2020) [pdf, 131 KB]

   ...[2020] NZDT 1535 APPLICANT VT 2 Limited VT Limited RESPONDENT BN The Tribunal hereby orders: BN is to pay VT Limited the sum of $8,637.50 within 28 days of the date of this order. Reasons 1. BN’s property at [address] had sustained damage as a result of the Canterbury earthquakes. In June 2018, BN had commenced proceedings against his insurer in the High Court in an attempt to settle his claim for the damage. As part of those proceedings, the Hi...

8. MacDonald v MacDonald - Wairau Blk.XII Sec. 6C 2C (2014) 27 Te Waipounamu MB 68 (27 TWP 68) [pdf, 141 KB]

   ...properly to be constructed as “reasonably necessary” and that it is “closer to that which is essential than that which is simply desirable or expedient.” [18] Second, if the statutory prerequisites are satisfied, the Court must then address the mandatory consideration in section 288(1). That section requires the Court to have regard to the opinion of the owners as a whole, the effect of the proposal on the interests of the owners, and the best overall use and development of...

9. [2021] NZREADT 48 - Kan (30 August 2021) [pdf, 260 KB]

   ...2020. He said that his work as a property manager was as a private individual, not as a licensee, and no real estate agency work was involved. He also said that as the Police complaint had been withdrawn the matter was at an end. He did not address the core issue of the complaint, that he had misappropriated rental payments. He declined requests for an interview [8] Mr Kan advised Ms Stevens on 14 February 2020 that he had decided to relinquish his involvement in real estate. M...

10. F Ltd v KI Ltd [2024] NZDT 135 (15 April 2024) [pdf, 152 KB]

    ...attended on 19 April 2023 but was unable to access the roof due to rain; and iv. at the hearing it was noted that the builder investigated and did some work shortly after 19 April 2023. 19. I find that there were parapet leaks which were not addressed within two days and continued on an ongoing basis for the period between 4 May and 26 October 2023. A period of 25 weeks (175 days). CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 4 of 6 Suspension of rent 20. F Ltd suspended rental payment...