New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Topic

Removal of party under s112

Legal area

Court

2 Jun 2015

LEE v AUCKLAND COUNCIL & ORS [2015] NZHC 1196 []

Citation

[2015] NZHC 1196
Court

High Court

The Tribunal erred in removing Auckland Council because appellants advanced a tenable negligence claim with expert evidence on duty, breach and causation that could not be finally determined on the limited material before the Tribunal; the causal relationship and effect of the appellants' failure to obtain a LIM are matters for full hearing; removal under s112 was premature and unfair, therefore appeal allowed and Council reinstated.
16 Aug 2012

BRICHRIS HOLDINGS LIMITED V AUCKLAND COUNCIL HC AK CIV-2011-404-7973

Citation

openlaw-524ab4a2_29a9_48cb_8e7a_acbf8b9042c0.pdf
Court

High Court

The Tribunal erred as a matter of law by characterising Brichris summarily as a residential property developer and removing Auckland Council; whether Brichris is a developer (and therefore outside the Council's duty) depends on factual findings whether the townhouses were developed in trade for the purpose of sale; the Tribunal's removal is set aside and the Council reinstated.