Previous determinations

This determination considers the compliance of low-pitched membrane roofs to a proposed three storey house.  The roofs are inward-sloping and employ slopes less than provided for in the Acceptable Solution for Clause E2 External moisture.

This determination considers the compliance of the second stage of a house built with rammed-earth walls used as a structural element and as a cladding.  The determination considers the compliance of the as-built work, the on-going maintenance of the rammed-earth walls, and whether the authority was correct in declining to issue a code compliance certificate for the work.

This determination considers the compliance of a base flashing detail installed to a portion of a shed containing a dwelling to resolve moisture ingress.  The determination discusses the extent of the remedial work required in relation to the uses of the shed and their relative Building Code obligations.

This determination considers the access requirements for a new office building being constructed as part of a development that includes an adjacent hotel.  The determination discusses aggregation of floor areas for the purpose of establishing whether the requirement for a lift is triggered.

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 The acceptable solution provided for in section 450A was revoked by way of Gazette notice on 27 April 2017.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 pool that is wholly enclosed within a dwelling but that doesn’t have a physical barrier to restrict access by unsupervised children. The determination discussions the exemption from the requirement to have a barrier that was granted under the Fencing of Swimming Pools Act, and the relationship with the current provisions for barriers to residential pools under the Building Act.

This determination considers whether the authority correctly exercised its powers in issuing a notice to fix for building work carried out without building consent having been obtained.  The matter turns on whether the building work was exempt under Schedule 1 as a repair or replacement of an outbuilding.

Note: The decisions in this Determination were confirmed on appeal to the District Court. See: Auckland Council v Jayashree Limited (District Court, Auckland, 14 February 2019, CIV-2018-004-00820).

Read appeal judgement [PDF 503KB].

This determination considers whether the authority was correct to issue a notice to fix in regard to unconsented building work and a change of use from a single house to sleeping accommodation. The determination also considers the authority’s decision regarding the certificate of acceptance.

This determination considers the compliance of consented alterations to an existing house where some inspections during the construction had not been completed by the authority. The determination considers the compliance of the as-built work and whether the authority was correct in declining to issue a code compliance certificate for the work.

This determination considers whether a frost fan falls within the definition of "building", and whether building consent is required for its installation.  The determination also discusses exemptions under Schedule 1 of the Building Act and the authority's requirement for an electrical works certificate

This determination considers the compliance of alteration and additions to an existing two-storey house that was the subject of two building consents.  The determination considers the compliance of the as-built work and whether the authority was correct in declining to issue code compliance certificates for the work.