Previous determinations

This determination considers decisions by an authority to issue two notices to fix regarding a newly constructed indoor playground comprising four separate structures. The determination considers the form and content of the notices, and whether there were grounds to issue the notices, including whether the building work was exempt from the requirement to obtain a consent, and whether the playground complies with Building Code Clause B1 Structure.

This determination considers an authority’s decision to issue a notice to fix alleging the owners had contravened several provisions of the Act. The determination discusses the details in the notice and whether the owners were fully and fairly informed of the basis for the notice being issued.

This determination considers the purported refusal of a building consent for alterations to a commercial building. The determination considers how the provisions of the Act apply to the assessment of the proposed additional floors for the purpose of clause B1 Structure of the Building Code. The determination explores the difference in the tests set out in section 17 and s112 of the Act.

This determination considers the authority’s decisions to issue two notices to fix for a retaining wall constructed by a previous owner of the neighbouring property. The determination considers whether there were grounds to issue the notices to fix to the applicant, and the form and content of the notices.

This determination considers an authority’s decisions to issue three successive notices to fix alleging the same contravention. The determination discusses the details required in a notice to fix, and the obligations of authorities in issuing notices to fix.

This determination considers an authority’s decision to grant building consents under section 72 of the Building Act 2004.  The authority’s decision gives rise to a natural hazard notice being entered on the record of title for the property where the building work will take place.

This determination considers whether there was a change of use in relation to a building
that was used for emergency housing, where previously it had been used as tourist
accommodation. More specifically, the determination considers whether the use group
changed from 'sleeping accommodation' to 'sleeping residential' and, if so, whether that
resulted in additional or more onerous Building Code requirements.

This determination considers whether the authority was correct in requiring a building consent for the construction of a wind turbine, and its decision to issue a notice to fix for the construction of the supporting foundation without a building consent being obtained. In deciding these matters, I have considered whether the wind turbine is a building and whether the foundation was exempt from the requirement to obtain a building consent.

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.