Previous determinations

This determination concerns alterations carried out without a building consent and considers the authority's decisions to refuse to issue a certificate of acceptance and to issue a notice to fix.  The determination considers whether the building work was exempt work or was subject to an existing building consent, and discusses the content of the notice to fix and of the notification of refusal.

This determination considers the authority's refusal to issue the code compliance certificate for a substantial addition to an existing studio building. The refusal arose from matters related to Building Code Clauses D1, E2, E3, and F4, but the principle issue was an ongoing dispute about the water from neighbouring properties and a small drain that has been installed to divert some of this water. The determination considers whether the drain formed part of the consented work or not.

This determination considers the authority’s decision to issue notices to fix for demolition work carried out without building consent.  The determination turns on whether the building is 'detached' and accordingly whether demolition of the building is exempt building work under Schedule 1.

This determination considers the authority’s refusal to grant an amendment to a building consent for alterations.  The applicant seeks to remove the requirement to close risers to the single set of stairs providing access to the upper level.  The determination discusses the application of section 112(1)(a) in the circumstances, and the assessment of compliance with Clause D1 Access routes to the extent "as nearly as is reasonably practicable"

Note: This determination is subject to clarification

This determination considers the authority’s decision to issue a notice to fix for work carried out without building consent.  The determination turns on whether the structure is a ‘building’ under section 8 of the Building Act or is excluded from that definition by section 9 because it is a ‘boat ...used in navigation’.

This determination considers the compliance of Cypress posts with Clause B2. The determination considers whether the authority was correct in its proposed refusal to issue the code compliance certificate.

This determination considers the compliance of a 14-year-old building. The determination considers the authority’s reasons for refusing to issue the code compliance certificate and whether the building work complies with the requirements of the Building Code.

Note: The decisions in this determination were reversed on appeal to the District Court. See: Palmerston North City Council v Brian Green Properties (1971) Limited (District Court, Palmerston North, 12 February 2020, CIV-2018-054-000288).

Read the appeal judgment.

This determination considers whether the authority was correct to issue a notice to fix in respect of locks to doors that are providing the means of escape to a commercial building containing food and retail outlets.  The determination considers whether the locked doors provide adequate means of escape from fire when the building has no occupants.

The determination considers the authority’s reasons for refusing to issue the code compliance certificate, and discusses the authority’s concerns about aspects of PS3 and PS4 producer statements provided in support of the application for a code compliance certificate.

Note: This determination is subject to clarification

This determination considers a notice to fix issued for the rebuilding, without a building consent, of a small extension or lean-to attached to a house. The matter turns on whether the components or assemblies replaced in the rebuilding of the structure were in the same position such that they were exempt under Schedule 1from the requirement for a consent, and whether the notice to fix was correctly issued.