நீதி ரேச்சல் டன்னிங்ஹாம் News Today : Breaking News, Live Updates & Top Stories | Vimarsana
Wānaka man abandons court action against Queenstown Lakes District Council
stuff.co.nz - get the latest breaking news, showbiz & celebrity photos, sport news & rumours, viral videos and top stories from stuff.co.nz Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday newspapers.
Judge awards neighbours of unfinished Wānaka mansion $27k
stuff.co.nz - get the latest breaking news, showbiz & celebrity photos, sport news & rumours, viral videos and top stories from stuff.co.nz Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday newspapers.
In that case bail had been granted by a Justice of the Peace, and again by a judge. Police had not opposed the bail application. Judge Walker learned that because bail had been unopposed, the court was not made aware of the alleged facts, the defendant’s history or the victim’s circumstances. He also learned that registrars in many courts were routinely granting bail applications when they were unopposed. The judge developed a minimum list of information that should be made available to a judge when bail was considered on family violence charges. This would be included in what is known as a family violence bail report (FVBR).
All in the family: Former Minister for Courts admits daughter to the bar
stuff.co.nz - get the latest breaking news, showbiz & celebrity photos, sport news & rumours, viral videos and top stories from stuff.co.nz Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday newspapers.
The neighbours also took issue with screening vegetation which was removed during construction. The council pointed out the application proposed removal of about 640 square metres of kanuka and, following construction, would provide 428 square metres of structural planting. Justice Dunningham ruled in favour of the neighbours. The neighbours also took issue with the height of the building, however the justice determined the council did not ignore its effects, and consequently did not uphold the ground of review. There was also contention about a removed consent notice, that would have mandated the building be screened from the shoreline. Justice Dunningham found the limited notification was made on the wrong legal basis, being that effects of vegetation removal were minor when they should have been less than minor.