Previous determinations

Determinations are made by MBIE on matters of doubt or dispute to do with building work. Rulings are legally binding, but only in relation to each case.

Previous determinations may provide some useful guidance for those faced with similar problems, but note that individual circumstances may vary.

You can also search for Determinations on Building CodeHub

Find a determination

Applying filters will narrow down your search results

Find a determination

Search results

1893 Determinations match your query
Show detailed results

2019/045: Regarding the classified use of a building, which is let out for public accommodation

This determination concerns the classified use of a building that is let out for public accommodation under Clause A1 Classified uses. The determination considers whether the classified use falls within “Detached dwellings” or “Community Service”. 

About this document

2019/044: Regarding the code compliance of a domestic garage and driveway and the issue of a building consent and code compliance certificate

This determination considers the compliance of a domestic garage and driveway with Building Code Clause D1 Access routes, including whether their dimensions are appropriate for the intended use. It also considers whether the building consent authority was correct to grant the building consent and code compliance certificate, and whether a proposal to widen the garage doorway (from 2.31 m to 2.8 m) would result in compliance.

About this document

2019/043: Regarding the issue of a notice to fix for two relocated units on a rural property

This determination considers whether a building consent authority correctly issued a notice to fix in relation to two relocated units. The units, which are on wheels, were built in another district and then transported to the applicant’s property. The determination looks at whether building work requiring a building consent was carried out at the property. 

About this document

2019/042: The code compliance of a garage built over a boundary

This determination concerns whether a garage built over a boundary complies with Clause C3 (Spread of Fire) of the Building Code in place when the building consent was issued, and whether the authority was correct to issue a code compliance certificate for the work.

About this document

2019/041: Regarding the provision of an accessible route to a cupola with an elevated viewing platform on a landscaped roof area

This determination considers whether a lift is required to an elevated viewing platform on a landscaped roof area of a building housing an arts centre in order to meet the requirements of the Building Act for reasonable and adequate access for people with disabilities.  The determination discusses the definition of “storey” for the purpose of Clause D1.3.4 of the Building Code and whether the cupola in which the viewing platform is housed is an “ancillary” building as defined in Clause A1 of the Building Code. 

About this document

2019/040: Regarding the authority's refusal to amend a compliance schedule to remove a mezzanine floor from the schedule for an early childhood centre

This determination considers the authority’s refusal to amend a compliance schedule to remove the fire-rated mezzanine floor from the schedule for an early childhood centre.

The matter turns on whether the fire-rated floor is a “fire separation” as that term is used in relation to specified systems.

About this document

2019/039: Regarding the exposure zone for building work located near a tidal estuary

This determination considers what is the appropriate exposure zone for a house located near a tidal estuary and the protection that is required to the brick ties used to secure the brick cladding.  The authority considered that the house was located in exposure Zone D which required stainless steel ties to be used.

About this document

2019/038: Regarding the compliance of a 23-year-old pool fence

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 considers the compliance of a trellis fence with the provisions of the Building Act that require the restriction of access by unsupervised young children to the swimming pool or immediate pool area.  The trellis has gaps up to 45mm high x 40mm wide and was installed with the horizontal slats on the outside face of the fence.

About this document

2019/037: The refusal to issue a code compliance certificate for a 17-year-old house with a corrugated cellulose fibre cladding system

This determination considers an authority’s refusal to issue a code compliance certificate for a 17-year-old house principally due to concerns about its compliance with Clause E2 External moisture.  The building owners had commissioned an assessment of the building’s performance which the authority had declined to accept.

About this document

2019/036: Regarding a notice to fix and whether a structure on trailers is a vehicle or a building

Note: ​The decision in this determination was confirmed on appeal to the District Court. See Marlborough District Council v Bilsborough [2020] NZDC 9962.

Read the appeal judgment.

This determination concerns a notice to fix issued for two relocated units built on trailers that were relocated onto site and joined via a walkway constructed onsite.  The determination considers whether the structure is a building for the purposes of the Act and whether the units separately are vehicles and not buildings.  It also considers the particulars of contravention identified in the notice to fix and the persons to whom the notice was issued.

About this document

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: