New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Resource management act 1991

Legal area

Court

12 Nov 2013

TRUSTPOWER LIMITED v THE COMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE [2013] NZHC 2970 ]

Citation

[2013] NZHC 2970
Court

High Court

Resource consents obtained by TrustPower for the four pipeline projects are not stand-alone assets separable from the projects; they are components of project feasibility work. Expenditure incurred in obtaining those consents formed part of recurrent feasibility expenditure in the development pipeline and is revenue in nature and deductible under the general permission (s DA1). Section DB13B and depreciation provisions do not mandate treating such consent costs as capital. Even if consents were treated as stand-alone assets, application of the BP Australia indicia and accounting recognition t…
21 Aug 2013

CLARENCE JOHN FALOON v PALMERSTON NORTH AIRPORT LIMITED [2013] NZHC 2124

Citation

[2013] NZHC 2124
Court

High Court

On the pleaded facts the runway diversion was lawfully constructed in 1958 and was saved from the Water and Soil Conservation Act 1967 regime; the diversion falls within the BRL Rule 1 description of an established structure and is therefore a permitted activity, so there is no factual or legal basis to establish a s 14 RMA breach; because nothing the appellant could have said at a further hearing would have altered that conclusion, the Environment Court's strike-out is upheld.
29 Jul 2013

HANNA v WHANGANUI DISTRICT COUNCIL [2013] NZHC 1875

Citation

[2013] NZHC 1875
Court

High Court

Because the parties agreed costs should be assessed on a 2B basis and the plaintiffs provided a costs schedule, the Court ordered the first defendant to pay the plaintiffs costs of $19,701 assessed on the 2B scale and disbursements of $1,188.40.
18 Apr 2013

INDEPENDENT FISHERIES LTD AND CLEARWATER LAND HOLDINGS LTD v MINISTER FOR CANTERBURY EARTHQUAKE RECOVERY SC 15/2013

Citation

SC 15/2013
Court

Supreme Court

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed because the Supreme Court lacks jurisdiction to entertain an appeal directed to the reasons of the Court of Appeal rather than to its decision, the applicants effectively seek an advisory opinion on the Minister's statutory powers, and any relevant future decisions by the Minister can be challenged in the usual way.
10 Sept 2010

OMAHA BEACH RESIDENTS' SOCIETY (INCORPORATED) AND GNS TRUST LIMITED V TOWNSEND BROOKER LIMITED, WILLIAMSON LIMITED, PAMELA RASPE, OMAHA PARK LIMITED CA CA527/2009

Citation

openlaw-3c78d8f5_2acd_4a60_9340_524a0e1c34ce.pdf
Court

Court of Appeal

The appeal is dismissed because there was no live controversy warranting declaratory relief and the Court will not overturn the High Court's discretionary refusal; questions about the covenant's enforceability (including whether it is a covenant in gross) must be decided in the context of a concrete dispute.
30 Mar 2010

RAYLEE PATRICIA HARLEY V THE REGISTRAR-GENERAL OF LAND HC WN CIV 2009-485-2167

Citation

openlaw-c86f5a18_8822_42d5_971a_ec8465de83be.pdf
Court

High Court

The Family Court may make orders vesting and partitioning relationship property and identify ownership of defined lots, but it has no jurisdiction under the PRA to effect a statutory subdivision or to direct the Registrar-General to deposit a survey plan or to issue titles; those functions are governed by the RMA and Land Transfer Act, and the Registrar-General was correct to refuse to deposit the plan and issue titles absent RMA/LTA compliance.
22 Dec 2009

GULF HARBOUR INVESTMENTS AND ANOR V RODNEY DISTRICT COUNCIL HC AK CIV 2006-404-005005

Citation

openlaw-750ce06d_8203_4596_9dcb_651f88c2821f.pdf
Court

High Court

GH Investments' development rights were constrained by the existing licence and statutory planning and local government obligations; the Council was not estopped from asserting those constraints though it conceded a limited duty to subdivide and lease; consequently the Council is entitled to costs but at category 2B with a one quarter reduction to reflect GH Investments' partial success, and the Registrar is to assess and certify the costs and disbursements including second counsel.

New Zealand Case Law

TRUSTPOWER LIMITED v THE COMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE [2013] NZHC 2970 ]

CLARENCE JOHN FALOON v PALMERSTON NORTH AIRPORT LIMITED [2013] NZHC 2124

HANNA v WHANGANUI DISTRICT COUNCIL [2013] NZHC 1875

INDEPENDENT FISHERIES LTD AND CLEARWATER LAND HOLDINGS LTD v MINISTER FOR CANTERBURY EARTHQUAKE RECOVERY SC 15/2013

OMAHA BEACH RESIDENTS' SOCIETY (INCORPORATED) AND GNS TRUST LIMITED V TOWNSEND BROOKER LIMITED, WILLIAMSON LIMITED, PAMELA RASPE, OMAHA PARK LIMITED CA CA527/2009

RAYLEE PATRICIA HARLEY V THE REGISTRAR-GENERAL OF LAND HC WN CIV 2009-485-2167

GULF HARBOUR INVESTMENTS AND ANOR V RODNEY DISTRICT COUNCIL HC AK CIV 2006-404-005005