Previous determinations

This determination arises from the authority's decision to issue a notice to fix for work carried out to a large dam without a building consent for the contravention of section 40. The owner and the authority disagree on the scope of works that required building consent.

This determination concerns the issue of a notice to fix by an authority in relation to a retaining wall that had been built by a neighbour over the property boundary and then subsequently demolished by the neighbour. The determination considers whether the owners of the property were the "owner of a building" and therefore a "specified person" in terms of section 163 of the Building Act, such that a notice to fix could be issued to them.

This determination considers an existing swimming pool barrier, comprised partly of the south wall of a dwelling and a garage wall, and whether it complies with section 162C of the Building Act 2004. The determination also discusses whether the doors on the south wall of a dwelling were included in an exemption granted under the Fencing of Swimming Pools Act 1987. The determination also considers whether the area encompassed by the south wall of a dwelling (the rear yard) can be considered to comprise the immediate pool area.

This determination considers the authority's decision to issue two notices to fix for a non-compliant pool barrier. The determination turns on whether the authority can issue a notice to fix to the current owners for a contravention of section 162C when they did not undertake the building work and when there is a code compliance certificate for that building work. The determination also considers the form and content of the notices that were issued.

This determination considers the decision making on two building consents and a code compliance certificate where the building work was carried out to the dwelling under separate building consents at the same time.

This determination considers whether the authority was correct in the exercise of its power of decision to issue a notice to fix for what the authority considers is building work that required a building consent. In order to make this determination I have considered whether a unit is a 'building' under section 8 of the Building Act 2004. The determination also considers whether the notice to fix was defective.

This determination considers whether the building consent authority was correct in the exercise of its power of decision to issue a notice to fix for a construction of a garage to replace an existing garage without first obtaining a building consent. This determination will turn on whether the building work to construct the garage is exempt under Schedule 1, clause 7 of the Building Act.

This determination considers the authority's decision to issue a notice to fix for building work carried out in contravention of section 40 of the Building Act (building work not to be carried out without building consent). In deciding this, consideration is given to whether the building work falls within the exemption outlined in Schedule 1(7) of the Act. This determination also considers the authority's decision to refuse to issue two discretionary exemptions applications under Schedule 1(2) of the Act (exemption from the requirement to obtain a building consent.

This determination considers whether the authority was correct to refuse to issue a code compliance certificate because it considers the stucco monolithic plaster applied to the external walls of an extension of an existing dwelling does not comply with clauses E2 External moisture and B2 Durability of the Building Code.

This determination considers whether a unit is a building that is subject to the Building Act. It discusses the tests of 'immovability' and 'permanent or long-term occupation' in relation to a vehicle, and the requirements for a notice to fix.