Previous determinations

This determination considers the authority’s decision to require a building consent for work carried out to a relocated dwelling to extend a kitchen into an area that was previously an enclosed veranda and close in an area that was previously the entrance to a back door. The decision turns on whether the building work falls within the scope of building work exempt under clause 15 of Schedule 1 of the Building Act 2004 from the requirement to obtain building consent.

This determination considers whether the authority was correct to refuse to grant an amendment to the building consent for the substitution of one roofing membrane product for another. This determination also considers whether this substitution would have constituted a minor variation to the building consent.

This determination considers the decision by an authority to issue a code compliance certificate for building work undertaken to alter an existing detached residential dwelling. The determination will consider the compliance of specific elements of the building work against the requirements of a building consent and the Building Code, taking into account all the information now available.

This determination considers an authority’s exercise of power of decision to refuse to grant a building consent for proposed alterations of an existing building. The determination considers the reasons given by the authority for the refusal, including the requirement for a peer review of the earthquake strengthening element of the building work.

This determination considers the authority’s decision to refuse to grant a building
consent for alterations to an existing detached building. The determination considers
the authority’s reasons for refusal and whether sufficient information was included in
the building consent application for the authority to be satisfied that the provisions of
the Building Code would be met if the building work were properly completed in
accordance with the plans and specifications that accompanied the application.

This determination considers an authority’s proposal to issue a notice to fix for what it considers is building work that has been carried out without building consent.

The matter concerns transportable dwellings, and the determination considers whether these are vehicles or buildings that come within the ambit of the Building Act.

Note: This determination was subject to appeal. The Determination was confirmed by the District Court. 

Read the appeal judgement

This determination explores whether a certificate of work is required from a licensed
building practitioner for the design of the roof trusses. This requires a decision of
whether the design of roof trusses is part of the primary structure of a dwelling and
restricted building work.

This determination considers the authority’s decision to refuse to grant a building
consent for alterations to an existing detached building. The determination considers the
authority’s reasons for refusal and whether sufficient information was included in the
building consent application for the authority to be satisfied that the provisions of the
Building Code would be met if the building work were properly completed in accordance
with the plans and specifications that accompanied the application.

This determination considers whether the bracing design for two external walls of a
single-storey timber-framed dwelling complied with the Building Code. In deciding this
matter, I have considered whether the bracing design complied with the means of
compliance stated in the building consent application, which was New Zealand
Standard NZS 3604:2011 Timber-framed buildings.

The matter to be determined, under section 177(1)(b) and (2)(f), is whether the authority was correct in its decision to issue a notice to fix for the owners’ structure. In deciding this matter, I must consider whether the structure was exempt from requiring a building consent under Schedule 1 of the Act, and whether the authority had sufficient evidence to consider on reasonable grounds that the building work did not comply with the Building Code.