Previous determinations

This determination considers whether the building consent should have been issued subject to a section 73 condition, which requires notification of a natural hazard to be placed on the land title. The determination considers whether the land is subject to a natural hazard, and whether the building work was a ‘major alteration’. 

This determination considers whether galvanised steel bearers used in subfloor framing to four houses meet the required minimum 50-year durability period described in Building Code Clause B2.3.1(a). The building consents for the houses were in respect of work described in national multiple-use approvals issued under section 30F of the Act. The houses have been built and the authority has refused to issue the code compliance certificates for the as-built work because it is of the view the bearers do not comply with Clause B2 Durability.

This determination considers the decision to issue a notice to fix for the construction of a storage building made up of relocated shipping containers and a roof. The authority is of the view that building work has been carried out which required building consent and therefore there has been a contravention of Section 40. As the building crosses a boundary into an adjacent allotment, the authority is also of the view there has been a contravention of section 75. This determination also discusses whether the containers have undergone a change of use.

This determination considers whether sufficient information was provided to support an application for building consent for a multi-unit building in relation to the building’s foundation design. The building is located on land that is being developed for subdivision and the determination also considers matters related to the identification of natural hazards on the site.

This determination considers the decision by the authority to issue a building consent with a section 37 certificate attached.  The determination discusses what the section 37 test ‘will or may materially affect building work’ means.

This determination concerns an authority’s issue of five notices to fix for building work carried out on a rural property.  The determination considers the time the owner was given to respond to the notices, and the non-compliances identified in the notices against the compliance of the work concerned. The determination also discusses the limitation period in which an authority shall take enforcement action following the issue of a notice to fix.

This determination considers the decision by the authority to issue a code compliance certificate for building work when some of the work had not been completed. The determination discusses the authority's ability to reverse the code compliance certificate.

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 an indoor pool barrier to the extent required by section 162C of the Building Act.  The barrier incorporates bifold doors and a sliding door.  The determination discusses the compliance requirement in relation to an indoor pool that was exempt from having a barrier under the former Fencing of Swimming Pools Act and the means by which compliance can be established.

This determination considers an authority's refusal to consent to a change of use for an existing building intended to be used as seasonal worker accommodation, on the basis that the building does not make reasonable and adequate provision for access and facilities for people with disabilities. The determination considers the authority's reasons for the refusal and the interrelationship between the change of use provisions and the requirement to provide access and facilities for persons with disabilities to and within buildings.

Note: The decision of this Determination was upheld on appeal to the District Court. See: CIV-2019-070-001005 - Western BOP DC v Limmer & NZ Kiwifruit Growers Inc.pdf

This determination considers the issue of a notice to fix in regard to building work carried out to convert an existing shed and sleep-out into a self-contained unit. The determination considers whether the authority was correct to issue the notice to fix, and whether a change of use had occurred.