NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.metro.co.uk/weird/article.html?in_article_id=41409&in_page_id=2

A New Zealand city council took itself to court for not obtaining proper consent (from itself) to move six houses built on a flood plain.

Ok, good for the council for holding itself to account, but surely there are better things that could be done with their money than taking itself to court?

Also on the Metro's website today: Brothel announces OAP discount (http://www.metro.co.uk/weird/article.html?in_article_id=41414&in_page_id=2)

Well didn't they automatically have consent..........?

Brothel announces OAP discount thats been covered

cazy New Zealanders :rolleyes:

Smells like bad reporting.

I can think of a good reason for that happening - that there was an internal dispute within the Council, and one party thought they could only have the dispute resolved in their favour if they took the city Council to court.

edit: But it does seem like this is common practice in NZ...
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/category/story.cfm?c_id=30&objectid=10429374

Smells like bad reporting.
Duh. It's the Metro. There's a reason it's free - no one's dumb enough to pay for it. Though Nemi's (nearly) always funny.

I can think of a good reason for that happening - that there was an internal dispute within the Council, and one party thought they could only have the dispute resolved in their favour if they took the city Council to court.

edit: But it does seem like this is common practice in NZ...
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/category/story.cfm?c_id=30&objectid=10429374
Stop trying to explain it, and just point and laugh. It's clearly the only solution.

However, I can't see why there'd be a dispute - if the correct consent hasn't been given, then the work shouldn't have gone ahead, no matter who was carrying out the work.

OBJECTION!

The council can't take themselves to court because... um... er... The clock was 9 hours fast?

Well didn't they automatically have consent..........?No. Residents should be allowed to voice any protests over planning permission. Maybe some local residents didn't want those houses demolished. Hence, they were stripped of this right and that's why the council broke its own by-laws.

Duh. It's the Metro. There's a reason it's free - no one's dumb enough to pay for it. Though Nemi's (nearly) always funny.


Stop trying to explain it, and just point and laugh. It's clearly the only solution.

However, I can't see why there'd be a dispute - if the correct consent hasn't been given, then the work shouldn't have gone ahead, no matter who was carrying out the work.Oh, alright then... *lols* Happy now?

Anyway, who's Nemi?

Oh, alright then... *lols* Happy now?

Anyway, who's Nemi?
Nemi's one of the cartoons in the Metro. www.metro.co.uk/nemi

http://www.metro.co.uk/weird/article.html?in_article_id=41409&in_page_id=2

A New Zealand city council took itself to court for not obtaining proper consent (from itself) to move six houses built on a flood plain.

Ok, good for the council for holding itself to account, but surely there are better things that could be done with their money than taking itself to court?

Also on the Metro's website today: Brothel announces OAP discount (http://www.metro.co.uk/weird/article.html?in_article_id=41414&in_page_id=2)

Sounds like the Swedish news to me.

Nemi's one of the cartoons in the Metro. www.metro.co.uk/nemioh, I reconise her. Yeah, that comic strip can ocassionally be funny.

I don't know why you people think the Metro is so bad... The again, it would be that I read the Toronto version of the Metro... http://www.metronews.ca/

And... a council took itself to court?? WTF?