Applying filters will narrow down your search results
This determination considers the authority's refusal to grant an amendment to a building consent for remediation of tiled decks. The matter turns on whether the acoustic mat as part of the proposed tiling system will comply with Clauses G6 and B2.
This determination considers whether the authority was correct to issue a notice to fix for three modified shipping containers transported to site and joined together to form a shed. The determination considers the definition of "building" and "building work", and discusses the content of the notice to fix.
This determination is concerned with the compliance of a 19-year-old house. The determination considers the authority’s reasons for refusing to issue the code compliance certificate and whether the building work complies with the requirements of the Building Code.
This determination considers the definitions of building under section 8 and building work under section 7, and whether the relocated structure is a building for the purposes of the Building Act. The determination also discusses the particulars of contravention/non-compliance described in the notice to fix with regard to building work carried out without building consent.
This determination considers a dangerous building notice that was issued as a result of notification from the New Zealand Fire Service, and whether there was sufficient evidence to reach the conclusion the building was dangerous. The determination discusses the authority's reliance on the notification issued under the Fire Service Act, the restriction on use for sleeping accommodation included in the notice, and the requirements identified in the notice.
This determination considers whether a barrier is required to a retaining wall in order to comply with Clause F4 safety from falling, and the authority's intention to issue a notice to fix. The determination also discusses whether building work completed after the code compliance certificate was issued required building consent or whether it was exempt.
This determination considered whether the authority’s decision to grant a building consent with an attached section 37 certificate that did not include a planning noncompliance that was not identified in the certificate. The determination also considers whether the authority could place a section 37 tag on the building work after the building consent had been issued.
This determination considers whether there was sufficient evidence provided in a building consent application for the authority to grant the consent under section 49 of the Act where half of a duplex is proposed to be demolished. The determination considered whether the proposed building work complies with Clauses B1, B2, C3, E2, and H1 of the Building Code.
This determination is concerned with the compliance of 19-year-old additions and alterations to a house. The determination considers the authority’s reasons for refusing to issue the code compliance certificate and whether the building work complies with the requirements of the Building Code.
This determination is concerned with the compliance of a 20-year-old house. The determination considers the authority’s reasons for refusing to issue the code compliance certificate and whether the house complies with the requirements of the Building Code.
This information is published by the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment’s Chief Executive. It is a general guide only and, if used, does not relieve any person of the obligation to consider any matter to which the information relates according to the circumstances of the particular case. Expert advice may be required in specific circumstances. Where this information relates to assisting people: