Previous determinations

This determination considered the detailing of the window and the surfaces required to comply with Clauses E3.3.2 and E3.4.5 of the Building Code, and the compliance of the window as a whole with Clause E3.3.6.

This determination concerns the compliance of a 10-year-old house with plywood, stone veneer, and horizontal weatherboard cladding. This 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 determination considers the compliance of an alternative solution proposing the use of a single handrail on the inner face of a secondary private spiral stairway. The determination discusses the relative angle of the handrail and the pitch line of the stairs, and whether the handrail is graspable and would provide sufficient grip to arrest a fall.

This determination arises from a dispute regarding the installation of cedar weatherboards in a manner that is not in accordance with the building consent or with the manufacturer’s instructions. The determination considers whether the weatherboards as installed comply with Clauses E2 and B2 of the Building Code.

This determination is concerned with the compliance of 14-year-old additions to a plastered brick veneer house. This determination considers the authority’s reasons for refusing the code compliance certificate, and whether the alterations comply with the requirements of the Building Code.

This determination is concerned with the design of a proposed pool building that is an outbuilding to a dwelling. The determination considers what Building Code clauses apply to pool building, and whether the information provided with the application for building consent demonstrates that the proposed work will comply with the requirements of the Building Code.

This determination confirms the extent of compliance required by the Act for a set of external concrete stairs that serve as the access route to a dwelling. The three flights of stairs were replaced due to damage caused by earthquake activity, and the majority of the building work was carried out as exempt building work under Schedule 1(2)(a). The determination discusses the term “apron or construction edge” as it is used in Clause D1.3.1(a) and as it applies in this case.

This determination discusses the code compliance of proposed wall and roof repairs in respect of interstitial condensation. The analysis took into account the expected occupancy of the units and factors affecting ventilation, the site and location, the past history of damage to the buildings, and the provisions proposed for reducing the risk of condensation.

This determination discusses the approaches used in two different test methodologies for products that are used in contact with drinking-water. The determination considered whether there is evidence currently available that would indicate whether asphalt shingles used as part of a rainwater harvesting system will leach contaminants or particulates to an extent that would make the collected water unsuitable for human consumption (non-potable).

This determination considers whether there was sufficient information provided in a building consent application to establish the compliance of the proposed building work, and whether the building work as constructed complies with the Building Code.