Search

Discussed whether the authority acted appropriately in ongoing reviews and actions (use of tools and methodologies available to it) in issuing a section 124 notice in an area affected by rock fall. It discussed modification of the meaning of dangerous building, the expiry of orders and applying new section 124 notices using the modified definition.

Note (added 11/08/2022): Please note that this determination incorrectly refers to section 450A of the Building Act 2004 as a compliance pathway for the pool barrier in this determination. The acceptable solution provided for in section 450A was revoked by way of Gazette notice on 27 April 2017. As the determination does not conclude that the pool barrier was compliant via the acceptable solution in section 450A, the outcome of the determination is not affected.

This determination is in relation to a pool barrier that has mature palm trees outside of and adjacent to it. The determination concerns the barrier’s compliance with the Building Code to the extent required by section 162C of the Building Act.

This determination considers the authority’s decision to refuse to issue a code compliance certificate: the grounds for the refusal were the authority’s concerns regarding the weathertightness and durability of the exterior envelope, the adequacey of barriers to a deck and stairs, surface water disposal, and a change of use. The determination reviewed the reasons given for the refusal and considered whether the items identified in the refusal comply with the Building Code.

N/A

Note: The decisions in this determination were reversed on appeal to the District Court. See: Alan Dall v MBIE (District Court, Christchurch, 19 February 2020, CIV-2019-085-000404).

Read the appeal judgment.

This determination considers whether a unit on a trailer is a building for the purposes of the Building Act, and whether the authority was correct to issue a notice to fix in relation to this. The determination discusses the definitions of building and vehicle under section 8 of the Building Act. 

This determination considers the authority’s decision to refuse to issue a code compliance certificate: the grounds for the refusal were the authority’s concerns regarding the weather-tightness given that the foam was installed through the cladding in some places rather than through the interior as approved. The determination reviewed the reasons given for the refusal and considered whether the external envelope complies with the Building Code.